/CVjr. -p 


THE  NATIONAL  ARBITRATION 
AND  PEACE  CONGRESS 


NEW  YORK,  APRIL  14th  TO  17th,  1907 


EDITED  BY  THE  SECRETARY 


23  West  44th  Street 
New  York 
1907 


Peace 


Were  half  the  power  that  fills  the  world  with  terror, 
Were  half  the  wealth  bestowed  on  camps  and  courts, 

Given  to  redeem  the  human  mind  from  error 
There  were  no  need  of  arsenals  and  forts. 

The  warrior’s  name  would  be  a name  abhorred ! 

And  every  nation  that  should  lift  again 

Its  hand  against  a brother,  on  its  forehead 
Would  wear  forevermore  the  curse  of  Cain. 

Down  the  dark  future,  through  long  generations, 

The  echoing  sounds  grow  fainter  and  then  cease : 

And  like  a bell,  with  solemn  sweet  vibrations, 

I hear  once  more  the  voice  of  Christ  say,  “Peace!  ” 

Peace ! and  no  longer  from  its  brazen  portals 
The  blast  of  war’s  great  organ  shakes  the  skies ! 

But,  beautiful  as  songs  of  the  immortals, 

The  holy  melodies  of  love  arise. 

Henry  Wadsworth  Longfellow , 

“ The  Arsenal  at  Springfield 


•>  _L1 


1901 

CONTENTS 


Officers  5 

Executive  Committee 6 

Introduction  7 

FIRST  SESSION — Choral  Service. 

Scripture  Reading. 

Address  by  Dr.  Emil  G.  Hirsch 13 

“ “ Bishop  Henry  C.  Potter 19 

“ “ Monsignor  M.  J.  Lavelle 20 

“ “ Archbishop  John  M.  Farley 22 

SECOND  SESSION — Opening  Meeting. 

Address  by  Mayor  George  B.  McClellan 27 

Letter  from  President  Roosevelt 30 

Address  by  Secretary  of  State  Elihu  Root 34 

“ “ Governor  Charles  E.  Hughes 47 

“ “ President  Andrew  Carnegie 51 

THIRD  SESSION — International  Views  of  the  Peace  Movement. 

Address  by  Baron  d’Estournelles  de  Constant 53 

“ “ Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor  Oscar  S.  Straus g2 

“ “ Prof.  Hugo  Mlinsterberg 65 

“ “ Dr.  Ernst  Richard 70 

“ “ William  T.  Stead 74 

“ “ Col.  Sir  Robert  Cranston 77 

“ “ “Maarten  Maartens”  79 

“ “ Sir  Robert  S.  Ball 80 

“ “ William  Jennings  Bryan 86 

FOURTH  SESSION — The  Relation  of  Women  to  the  Peace  Movement. 

Address  by  Lucia  Ames  Mead 88 

“ “ Ellen  M.  Henrotin 93 

“ “ Mary  E.  Woolley 97 

“ “ Mrs.  Frederick  Nathan 101 

“ “ Jane  Addams  106 

“ “ William  Archer  110 

Letter  from  Julia  Ward  Howe 117 

Address  by  May  Wright  Sewall 120 

FIFTH  SESSION — Commercial  and  Industrial  Aspects  of  the  Peace 
Movement. 

Address  by  Marcus  M.  Marks 124 

“ “ Baron  d’Estoumelles  de  Constant 126 

“ “ Secretary  Oscar  S.  Straus 134 

“ “ James  W.  Yan  Cleave 138 

“ “ Hon.  Nahum  J.  Bachelder 145 

“ “ Hon.  John  Barrett 149 

“ “ Edwin  Ginn 152 

“ “ William  McCarroll  157 

SIXTH  SESSION — Young  People’s  Meeting. 

Address  by  Dr.  William  H.  Maxwell i62 

“ “ Prof.  Henry  Turner  Bailey 154 

“ “ Dr.  Nathan  C.  Schaeffer ies 

“ “ Charles  Sprague  Smith 170 

“ “ Baron  d’Estournelles  de  Constant 175 

Letter  from  Dr.  Edward  Everett  Hale 179 

Address  by  Rabbi  Stephen  S.  Wise 180 

“ “ Dr.  James  J.  Walsh 183 

“ “ Senorita  Carolina  Huidobro 186 

“ “ William  T.  Stead 191 

SEVENTH  SESSION — University  Meeting. 

Address  by  Dr.  Nicholas  Murray  Butler 19s 

“ “ Dr.  John  Rhys 200 

“ “ Rev.  E.  S.  Roberts 203 

“ “ Dr.  John  H.  Finley 206 

“ “ Dr.  Felix  Adler 210 

“ “ Jane  Addams  213 

“ “ Edwin  D.  Mead 216 

EIGHTH  SESSION — Labor  Meeting. 

Address  by  Joseph  R.  Buchanan 223 

Resolutions  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor 224 

Address  by  Terence  V.  Powderly 226 

“ “ James  J.  Murphy 229 

“ “ Leonora  O’Reilly  232 

“ “ John  S.  Whalen „ 239 

“ “ Algernon  S.  Crapsey 239 

“ “ Samuel  Gompers  247 

“ “ William  T.  Stead 263 


-•  • \ jt  f *v  1 > / 

, i ' >.  !?•,  « i 


Contents—  Continued 
CONFERENCE  FOR  PEACE  WORKERS. 

Address  by  Elizabeth  Powell  Bond 

“ “ Hannah  J.  Bailey 

“ “ Mrs.  Hariy  Hastings 

“ “ Carrie  Chapman-Catt  

“ “ Rev.  Anna  Howard  Shaw 

“ “ Sevasti  N.  Callisperi 

“ “ May  Wright  Sewall. 

CONFERENCE  OF  DELEGATES. 

Address  by  Dr.  Benjamin  F.  Trueblood 

Resolutions  of  the  National  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress 

Remarks  by  Hon.  Richard  Bartholdt 

“ “ Chancellor  Henry  M.  MacCracken 

“ 4 Dr.  Samuel  J.  Barrows.... 

“ “ Dr.  J.  Leonard  Levy 

“ “ Belva  Lockwood  

44  “ Judge  Thomas  Murphy 

“ “ William  Jennings  Bryan 

44  “ Alfred  H.  Love 

“ “ Lucia  Ames  Mead 

“ “ Judge  Lloyd  E.  Chamberlain 

Resolutions  of  the  Massachusetts  State  Board  of  Trade 

Remarks  by  Edward  H.  Magill 

“ “ Anna  Garlin  Spencer 

44  44  S.  L.  Hartman 

44  “ J.  C.  Clayton 

“ 44  Marcus  M.  Marks 

“ “ Mrs.  Robert  Abbe 

44  44  Thomas  Nelson  Page 

44  44  Dr.  Ernst  Richard 

NINTH  SESSION — The  Legislative  and  Judicial  Aspects  of  the  Peace 
Movement. 

Flag  Presentation  by  Richmond  Pearson  Hobson. 

Address  by  President  Andrew  Carnegie 

44  44  Hon.  Seth  Low 

“ 44  Hon.  Richard  Bartholdt 

44  44  Judge  William  W.  Morrow 

“ 44  Hon.  John  W.  Foster 

“ 44  S'enor  Diego  Mendoza 

44  44  Judge  George  Gray 

“ 44  William  Jennings  Bryan 

BANQUET  AT  HOTEL  ASTOR. 

Address  by  President  Andrew  Carnegie 

44  “ Earl  Grey  

44  44  Senor  D.  Enrique  C.  Creel 

44  44  Rt.  Hon.  James  Bryce 

44  “ Dr.  Edward  Everett  Hale 

Presentation  of  the  Cross  of  the  Legion  of  Honor  to  Mr.  Carnegie. 

Address  by  Samuel  Gompers  

44  “ President  Charles  W.  Eliot 

“ 44  William  Jennings  Bryan 

BANQUET  AT  THE  WALDORF-ASTORIA. 

Address  by  Hon.  Seth  Low 

“ “ Baron  d’Estournelles  de  Constant 

“ “ Prof.  Kuno  Francke 

“ “ William  Jennings  Bryan 

44  “ Archbishop  John  Ireland 

44  44  Senor  D.  Enrique  C.  Creel 

44  44  Prof.  John  Bassett  Moore 

44  “ Col.  Sir  Robert  Cranston 

44  44  Dr.  Lyman  Abbott 

Other  Meetings  

Historical  Note  

Resolutions  

Letters  and  Telegrams 

Foreign  Guests  

Subscribers  . 

Delegates  


267 

271 

275 

281 

285 

288 

292 

295 

2% 

299 

301 

304 

307 

309 

311 

312 

313 

314 

316 

316 

317 

318 

318 

318 

320 

321 

322 

323 

328 

329 

332 

338 

340 

343 

349 

363 

361 

362 

369 

371 

376 

382 

386 

390 

396 

398 

401 

405 

410 

413 

415 

420 

422 

428 

429 

432 

437 

446 

447 

449 


ILLUSTRATIONS 


President  Theodore  Roosevelt Frontispiece 

FACING  PAGE 

Andrew  Carnegie 5 

Choral  Service n 

“Good-Will  Among  Men” 27 

Group  I 47 

Hon.  Elihu  Root 


Governor  Charles  E.  Hughes 
Hon.  Oscar  S.  Straus 
Hon.  Seth  Low 
Hon.  Richard  Bartholdt 

Group  II  76 

Col.  Sir  Robert  Cranston 
W.  T.  Stead 
Dr.  John  Rhys 

Sir  William  Henry  Preece,  F.R.S. 

Sir  Robert  Ball,  F.R.S. 

Group  III 87 

Mrs.  May  Wright  Sewall 
Miss  Jane  Addams 
Mrs.  Ellen  M.  Henrotin 
Miss  Mary  E.  Woolley 
Senorita  Carolina  Huidobro 
Mrs.  Lucia  Ames  Mead 
Mrs.  Hannah  J.  Bailey 


Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe 117 

Young  People’s  Meeting 163 

Baron  d’Estournelles  de  Constant . . 176 

Group  IV 204 


Pres.  Charles  W.  Eliot 
Bishop  Henry  C.  Potter 
Rev.  Dr.  Lyman  Abbott 
Pres.  Nicholas  Murray  Butler 
Archbishop  John  M.  Farley 

Group  V 223 

Hon.  William  Jennings  Bryan 
Hon.  Nahum  J.  Bachelder 
Samuel  Gompers 
Hon.  John  Barrett 
William  McCarroll 


ILLUSTRATIONS—  Continued 

FACING  PAGE 


A Peace  Congress  Audience 264 

Group  VI. . 295 

Hon.  John  W.  Foster 


Archbishop  John  Ireland 

Prof.  Hugo  Munsterberg 

■ 

Dr.  William  H.  Maxwell 

Edwin  Ginn 

Senor  Diego  Mendoza 


Presentation  of  the  Peace  Flag  to  Mr.  Carnegie ...  327 

Banquet  Invitation  361 

Group  VII 370 

His  Excellency  Earl  Grey 
His  Excellency  Don  Enrique  C.  Creel 
His  Excellency  James  Bryce 
Sir  Edward  Elgar 


J.  M.  W.  Van  der  Poorten  Schwartz  (“  Maarten  Maartens”) 


The  Banquet,  Hotel  Astor  394 

Dr.  Edward  Everett  Hale 414 

Group  VIII— The  Vice-Presidents 429 


Hon.  William  H.  Taft 
Hon.  George  B.  Cortelyou 
Hon.  George  von  L.  Meyer 
Hon.  Charles  T.  Bonaparte 
Hon.  James  R.  Garfield 
Hon.  James  Wilson 
Hon.  Victor  L.  Metcalf 

Group  IX— The  Vice-Presidents 447 

Judge  David  J.  Brewer 
Mayor  George  B.  McClellan 
Robert  Treat  Paine 
Hon.  Andrew  D.  White 
John  Mitchell 
Albert  K.  Smiley 
Hon.  Alton  B.  Parker 

Groups  X and  XI 478 

The  Executive  Committee 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/proceedingsofnat00amer_0 


From  Stereograph,  Copyright  1907,  by  Underwood  & Underwood,  New  York. 


OFFICERS 


Andrew  Carnegie,  President. 

Vice-Presidents : 

Hon.  Andrew  D.  White,  Member  First  Hague  Conference. 

Hon.  Seth  Low,  Member  First  Hague  Conference. 

Judge  George  Gray,  Member  Hague  Permanent  Court. 

Hon.  Richard  Bartholdt,  MuC.,  President  American  Arbitration  Group. 
Albert  K.  Smiley,  Founder  Mohonk  Arbitration  Conference. 

Robert  Treat  Paine,  President  American  Peace  Society. 

Hon.  Alton  B.  Parker,  President  American  Bar  Association. 

Samuel  Gompers,  President  American  Federation  of  Labor. 

John  Mitchell,  President  United  Mine  Workers  of  America. 

Hon.  George  B.  McClellan,  Mayor  of  New  York. 

Morris  K.  Jesup,  President  New  York  Chamber  of  Commerce. 

Hon.  Charles  E.  Hughes,  Governor  of  New  York  State. 

Judge  David  J.  Brewer,  United  States  Supreme  Court. 

Hon.  George  B.  Cortelyou,  Secretary  of  the  Treasury. 

Hon.  William  H.  Taft,  Secretary  of  War. 

Hon.  Charles  J.  Bonaparte,  Attorney-General. 

Hon.  George  von  L.  Meyer,  Postmaster-General. 

Hon.  Victor  H.  Metcalf,  Secretary  of  the  Navy. 

Hon.  James  R.  Garfield,  Secretary  of  the  Interior. 

Hon.  James  Wilson,  Secretary  of  Agriculture. 

Hon.  Oscar  S.  Straus,  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor. 

Hon.  William  Jennings  Bryan,  Lincoln,  Nebraska. 

Robert  Erskine  Ely,  Secretary. 

George  Foster  Peabody,  Treasurer. 


EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE 


Chairman:  Prof.  Samuel  T.  Dutton,  Teachers’  College,  Columbia  Uni- 
versity. 

Secretary:  Robert  Erskine  Ely,  Director  League  for  Political  Education. 

NEW  YORK. 

Hayne  Davis,  American  Secretary  of  the  International  Conciliation  Com- 
mittee. 

Ralph  M.  Easley,  Chairman  Executive  Council  of  the  National  Civic 
Federation. 

Hamilton  Holt,  Managing  Editor  of  The  Independent. 

Prof.  George  W.  Kirch  wey,  Dean  Columbia  University  Law  School. 
Henry  M.  Leipziger,  Supervisor  of  Lectures,  Board  of  Education. 

Rev.  Frederick  Lynch,  Pastor  Pilgrim  Congregational  Church. 

Marcus  M.  Marks,  Chairman  Conciliation  Committee,  New  York  Civic 
Federation. 

John  E.  Milholland. 

Prof.  John  Bassett  Moore,  Columbia  University. 

Mrs.  Frederick  Nathan. 

Miss  Mary  J.  Pierson. 

Ernst  Richard,  President  German-American  Peace  Society. 

Charles  Sprague  Smith,  Director  People’s  Institute. 

Mrs.  Anna  Garlin  Spencer,  Society  for  Ethical  Culture. 

Mrs.  Henry  Villard. 


Edwin  D.  Mead,  Boston,  Chairman  Executive  Committee  International 
Peace  Congress,  1904. 

Benjamin  F.  Trueblood,  Boston,  Secretary  American  Peace  Society. 
Mahlon  N.  Kline,  Philadelphia. 

Stanley  R.  Yarnall,  Philadelphia. 

James  B.  Reynolds,  Washington. 

William  Christie  Herron,  Cincinnati. 

Rev.  Jenkin  Lloyd  Jones,  Chicago,  Pastor  All  Souls’  Church. 

Rabbi  J.  Leonard  Levy,  Pittsburg. 

Daniel  Smiley,  Mohonk  Arbitration  Conference. 

H.  C.  Phillips,  Secretary  Mohonk  Arbitration  Conference. 


Financial  Secretary : SHERMAN  M.  CRAIGER 

Executive  Officer : THEODORE  HARDEE  Office  Secretary : MARY  B.  CLEVELAND 


Introduction  and  Summary 

The  National  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress  has  been  called  “the 
greatest  gathering  ever  held  in  advocacy  of  the  abolition  of  war  as  a 
means  of  settling  international  disputes,  and  the  most  important  non- 
political gathering  ever  held  in  this  country  for  any  purpose.” 

The  suggestion  that  the  first  National  Peace  Congress  in  America 
meet  in  New  York  in  the  Spring  of  1907,  came  from  Mr.  Edwin  D. 
Mead  and  Dr.  Benjamin  F.  Trueblood  of  Boston.  Mr.  Mead  was  the 
Chairman  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  International  Peace  Congress 
which  assembled  in  Boston  in  October,  1904.  D*r.  Trueblood  has  been  the 
Secretary  of  the  American  Peace  Society  for  many  years.  The  success 
of  the  Boston  Congress,  the  long  and  effective  work  of  the  Mohonk 
Arbitration  Conferences  and  of  the  leading  Peace  Societies  in  influencing 
public  sentiment,  encouraged  the  friends  of  the  Peace  movement  in  New 
York  to  assume  the  task  suggested  to  them. 

The  first  step  toward  the  successful  issue  of  the  Congress  was  taken 
when  Mr.  Andrew  Carnegie  consented  to  be  its  President.  The  presidency 
of  Mr.  Carnegie  was  of  immense  service  in  every  respect.  The  feeling 
toward  him  of  the  members  of  the  Congress  and  of  the  adherents  of  the 
Peace  cause  on  this  continent  and  abroad  was  symbolized  by  Baron 
d’Estournelles  de  Constant  in  the  act  of  conferring  upon  him  the  cross  of 
the  Legion  of  Honor  at  the  closing  banquet.  A large  number  of  distin- 
guished men  from  several  European  countries  had  been  invited  by  Mr. 
Carnegie  to  be  present  at  the  dedication  of  the  Carnegie  Institute  in  Pitts- 
burg on  April  nth.  The  date  of  the  Congress  was  so  fixed  that  it  closely 
followed  this  event,  and  the  attendance  of  nearly  all  of  these  representatives 
of  foreign  nations  was  therefore  secured. 

The  latest  recipient  of  the  Nobel  Prize,  President  Roosevelt,  was  in 
cordial  sympathy  with  the  Congress  and  gave  to  it  his  earnest  support,  as 
was  shown  by  his  letter.  Every  member  of  his  Cabinet  was  a Vice- 
President  of  the  Congress  and  two  Cabinet  officers  were  among  the 
speakers. 

Those  who  were  responsible  for  the  Congress  determined  that  while 
it  should  stand  uncompromisingly  for  the  highest  ideals,  at  the  same  time 
it  should  be  intensely  practical  in  tone  rather  than  Utopian.  In  view 
of  the  approaching  Hague  Conference,  it  was  earnestly  hoped  that  the 
addresses  delivered  and  the  resolutions  passed  would  be  of  a character 
to  assure  the  delegates  at  The  Hague,  especially  those  from  this  country, 
of  the  strong  sympathy  and  support  of  the  great  mass  of  the  American 
people  in  the  movement  for  a definitely  advanced  Peace  Program.  The 
Congress  was  to  stand  for  every  inch  of  progress  which  can  be  made 
now  toward  the  goal  of  International  Peace.  Peace  was  to  be  regarded 
as  a practical  business  proposition,  as  well  as  a noble  ideal. 

The  hopes  of  the  officers  of  the  Congress  in  this  respect  were  realized. 
There  were  more  delegates  representing  Chambers  of  Commerce,  Boards 
of  Trade  and  similar  organizations  of  business  men  than  from  almost 


8 


any  other  single  class  of  organizations,  and  probably  more  business  men 
of  high  standing  and  representing  all  branches  of  trade  and  industry 
participated  in  the  Congress  than  had  ever  before  attended  and  taken 
part  in  any  educational  or  philanthropic  gathering. 

Labor  as  well  as  capital,  the  vast  agricultural  interests  of  the  nation 
as  well  as  the  commercial  and  manufacturing  interests,  were  represented. 
Among  the  speakers  were  the  President  of  the  American  Federation  of 
Labor,  who  spoke  for  the  two  and  a half  million  wage-earners  in  the  ranks 
of  organized  labor;  the  President  of  the  National  Association  of  Manu- 
facturers, representing  three  thousand  manufacturing  establishments  in 
which  millions  of  dollars  are  invested;  and  the  Master  of  the  National 
Grange,  representing  thirty  thousand  local  organizations  of  farmers. 

It  was  this  intensely  practical  temper  on  the  part  of  the  delegates, 
both  men  and  women,  which  led  to  the  passing  of  the  Resolutions  sum- 
ming up  the  purposes  and  convictions  of  the  Congress.  These  resolutions 
have  been  characterized  by  the  press  of  the  United  States  substantially 
without  dissent  as  thoroughly  practical,  business-like  and  realizable. 

In  order  that  the  magnitude  and  impressiveness  of  the  Congress  may 
be  appreciated,  a few  facts  are  here  given : 

The  names  of  nearly  10,000  persons  were  received  who  were  regularly 
appointed  as  the  official  delegates  of  institutions,,  organizations  and  societies 
of  all  kinds.  There  were  in  actual  attendance  at  the  Congress  1,253 
delegates  who  registered  at  the  headquarters.  A considerable  number  of 
delegates  present  failed  to  register.  These  registered  delegates  came  from 
thirty-nine  states  and  territories.  The  far  south  and  the  Pacific  coast  were 
well  represented  as  well  as  the  nearer  sections  of  the  country.  For 
example,  nine  delegates  came  from  Alabama,  two  from  Texas,  two  from 
Oklahoma,  five  from  Wisconsin,  two  from  Montana,  four  from  California. 
From  the  New  England  and  middle  states  there  were  large  delegations. 
Massachusetts  sent  sixty-three  persons,  Connecticut  sixty-one,  and  so  on. 
There  were  representatives  from  seventeen  or  more  foreign  countries, 
including  all  of  the  great  powers  and  many  of  the  smaller  nations  of 
Europe,  and  also  India,  China  and  Japan.  In  the  western  hemisphere, 
the  various  provinces  of  Canada  and  also  Mexico,  Central  America  and 
South  America  were  represented. 

Special  invitations  to  appoint  delegates  were  sent  in  the  name  of  the 
various  sub-committees,  to  groups  of  organizations  as  follows : Commercial 
bodies ; labor  unions ; farmers'  granges ; churches  and  other  religious 
organizations ; Peace  Societies ; ethical,  reform  and  philanthropic  societies ; 
colleges,  universities  and  other  educational  institutions ; learned  societies ; 
women’s  organizations ; patriotic  societies.  The  medical  and  legal  profes- 
sions, journalism  and  literature,  the  fine  arts  and  the  drama  were  repre- 
sented on  the  committees  by  some  of  their  foremost  leaders. 

The  Governors  of  States  and  the  mayors  of  cities  were  invited,  and 
many  came.  Invitations  in  the  name  of  the  legislative  committee  to 
members  of  both  Houses  of  Congress  and  of  the  State  Legislatures  were 
in  many  cases  accepted.  The  judiciary  committee  enlisted  the  sympathy 
and  co-operation  of  federal  and  state  judges.  A remarkable  press  com- 


9 

mittee  was  formed,  members  of  which  were  the  editors-in-chief  of  all  the 
important  daily  newspapers  in  New  York  City,  the  editors  of  nearly 
all  of  the  important  weekly  and  monthly  journals,  and  the  managers  of  all 
of  the  news  associations. 

There  participated  in  the  Congress  prominent  representatives  of  the 
chief  religious  denominations,  Hebrew  and  Christian,  Catholic  and  Protes- 
tant, orthodox  and  liberal,  and  also  of  the  ethical  societies  and  free- 
thought  organizations.  The  Cardinal  and  two  of  the  Archbishops  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church,  Bishops  of  the  Episcopal  and  Methodist  Churches, 
and  leaders  in  the  other  great  religious  bodies  were  actively  connected  with 
the  Congress. 

Delegates  were  appointed  by  a large  majority  of  the  four  hundred 
colleges  and  universities  of  the  land  and  many  of  these  were  in  attendance 
at  the  meeting.  The  Governor  of  New  York  State  appointed  a committee 
of  fifteen  from  both  houses  of  the  State  Legislature  to  represent  that  body 
at  the  Congress,  and  all  but  two  members  of  this  committee  attended  some 
of  its  sessions. 

The  register  of  the  Congress  and  its  committees  showed  that  there 
were  enrolled  among  its  membership  and  supporters  two  men  who  had 
been  candidates  for  the  Presidency  of  the  United  States,  eight  Cabinet 
officers,  ten  United  States  Senators,  nineteen  members  of  the  House  of 
Representatives,  four  Justices  of  the  Supreme  Court,  twelve  State  Chief 
Justices,  nine  State  Governors,  sixty  New  York  editors,  thirty  labor 
leaders,  ten  mayors,  eighteen  college  and  university  presidents,  twenty 
State  Superintendents  of  Public  Instruction,  and  forty  bishops. 

It  is  estimated  that  the  total  attendance  at  the  seven  meetings  in 
Carnegie  Hall,  at  the  Business  Men’s  meeting  at  Hotel  Astor,  the  Labor 
meeting  at  Cooper  Union,  the  conferences,  the  two  banquets,  the  three 
luncheons,  the  receptions  and  the  over-flow  meetings  amounted  to  con- 
siderably over  40,000.  Never  before  in  its  history  was  Carnegie  Hall  filled 
to  its  full  capacity  three  times  in  one  day,  in  the  morning,  afternoon  and 
evening,  by  audiences  gathered  for  any  one  educational  or  philanthropic 
purpose.  Especially  worthy  of  mention  were  the  Children’s  meeting, 
at  which  were  gathered  between  four  and  five  thousand  children  and 
teachers,  representing  the  six  hundred  thousand  pupils  in  the  public 
schools  of  New  York  City,  and  also  to  some  extent  the  schools  of  neigh- 
boring cities;  and  the  Women’s  meeting,  at  which  were  delegates  repre- 
senting hundreds  of  thousands  of  American  women  connected  with  colleges, 
churches,  clubs,  reform,  educational  and  charitable  organizations  from 
one  end  of  the  country  to  the  other.  The  interest  fittingly  culminated 
in  the  two  great  banquets  held  simultaneously  at  the  close  of  the  Congress, 
at  Hotel  Astor  and  the  Waldorf-Astoria,  and  arranged  by  Mr.  Russell 
and  Mr.  de  Lima. 

A word  must  be  said  as  to  the  preparatory  work  for  the  Congress. 
Under  the  auspices  of  the  New  York  Peace  Society  meetings  were  held, 
during  the  preceding  three  months,  in  the  churches  of  New  York  and 
vicinity,  for  the  purpose  of  presenting  the  Peace  cause.  On  the  Sunday 
on  which  the  Congress  opened,  April  14,  sermons  were  preached  and 


IO 

addresses  delivered  in  advocacy  of  International  Peace  in  every  city  in 
the  United  States  of  over  five  thousand  inhabitants,  and  in  many  of  the 
smaller  cities,  towns  and  villages.  The  sympathy  and  co-operation  of 
the  press  of  the  country  was  of  immense  value.  In  order  that  the  plans 
for  the  Congress  might  be  known  and  understood,  three  dinners  were 
given  in  February  and  March,  one  by  the  New  York  Peace  Society  to  the 
editors  of  New  York;  one  by  Mr.  William  H.  Taylor  to  the  City  Editors 
and  the  Congress  Committee,  and  one  to  the  Reporters  and  the  Committee 
by  Mr.  John  D.  Higgins.  The  daily  newspapers  of  the  metropolis  gave 
an  unprecedented  amount  of  space  to  the  gatherings,  and  most  of  the 
addresses  were  published  either  in  full  or  in  part,  or  commented  upon  by 
twelve  thousand  newspapers,  and  weekly  and  monthly  periodicals  of  all 
kinds  in  the  United  States. 

The  spirit  which  animated  all  who  were  in  any  way  connected  with 
the  Congress  and  who  were  present  at  its  meetings,  was  remarkable. 
There  was  universal  enthusiasm,  earnestness  and  friendliness.  It  was 
felt  that  the  Congress  platform  should  be  a free  one  in  the  sense  that 
entire  agreement  in  details  on  the  part  of  the  speakers  was  not  expected 
or  even  desired.  There  was  entire  liberty  of  utterance.  The  striking  result 
of  this  was,  that  beneath  occasional  superficial  differences  which  helped 

to  give  vitality  to  the  meetings,  there  was  intense  fundamental  agreement. 

The  officers  of  the  Congress  wish  to  express  their  thanks  to  all  who 
in  any  degree  contributed  to  its  success;  to  the  speakers;  to  the  members 
of  all  the  committees ; to  the  other  workers,  both  those  regularly  employed 
and  the  volunteers ; to  the  subscribers  to  the  fund  to  meet  the  expenses, 
without  whose  aid  this  gathering  would  have  been  impossible;  to  the 
representatives  of  the  press ; to  the  clergymen  and  religious  leaders  of 

all  kinds;  and  by  no  means  last,  to  the  women  of  the  committees  repre- 

senting various  women’s  organizations,  who  added  much  to  the  cumulative 
effect  of  the  proceedings. 

The  especial  attention  of  all  into  whose  hands  this  volume  comes,  is 
invited  to  the  Resolutions  which  were  passed.  These  Resolutions  and 
the  other  action  taken  embody  the  idea  that  the  work  of  the  Peace 
Congress  is  to  be  permanent  and  steadily  enlarging.  The  day  has  come, 
not  merely  for  occasional  and  sporadic  gatherings,  however  large  and 
enthusiastic,  in  the  interest  of  the  Peace  movement,  but  for  steady,  out- 
reaching,  progressive  work  which  will  never  cease  until  the  end  in  view 
shall  be  reached.  The  Peace  cause  henceforth  takes  on  a new  aspect. 
It  is  now  a popular  cause.  The  overwhelming  mass  of  the  people  of  the 
United  States  representing  every  creed,  class,  party  and  occupation,  have 
proved  emphatically  and  beyond  question  that  they  have  a profound 
desire  that  war  between  nations  should  cease.  Public  sentiment,  not 
merely  in  America,  but  in  the  whole  world,  is  more  and  more  the  real 
sovereign.  To  focus  and  intensify  public  sentiment  on  this  subject  and 
to  bring  it  to  effective  expression  in  action,  is  the  work  before  us.  The 
promoters  of  the  first  National  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress  have  a 
strong  faith  that  this  task  will  be  accomplished. 


R.  E.  E. 


Choral  Service,  Carnegie  Hall,  Sunday  Evening,  April  14th 


II 


FIRST  SESSION 
CHORAL  SERVICE 

Carnegie  Hall 

Sunday  Evening,  April  Fourteenth,  at  8.15 

BISHOP  POTTER  Presiding 

Responsive  Reading  from  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures 
Conducted  by  Rev.  Charles  E.  Jefferson,  D.D. 

God  reigneth  over  the  nations; 

He  hath  prepared  his  throne  for  judgment. 

And  he  will  judge  the  world  in  righteousness ; 

He  will  minister  judgment  to  the  peoples  in  uprightness. 

He  hath  showed  strength  with  his  arm; 

He  hath  scattered  the  proud  in  the  imagination  of  their  heart. 

He  hath  put  down  princes  from  their  thrones, 

And  he  hath  exalted  them  of  low  degree. 

He  delighteth  not  in  the  strength  of  the  horse ; 

He  hath  no  pleasure  in  the  thews  of  a man. 

The  Lord  hath  pleasure  in  them  that  fear  him. 

He  will  bring  forth  justice  to  the  nations; 

He  will  bring  forth  justice  in  truth. 

He  will  not  fail  nor  faint,  till  he  have  set  justice  in  the  earth; 
And  the  isles  shall  wait  for  his  law. 

Arise,  O Lord;  let  the  nations  be  judged  in  thy  sight. 

Put  them  in  fear,  O Lord; 

Let  the  nations  know  themselves  to  he  but  men. 

Through  the  arrogance  of  the  wicked  the  poor  is  oppressed. 
The  wicked  praise  God  for  the  success  of  their  greed; 

They  say  in  their  heart : God  hath  forgotten ; 

He  hideth  his  face,  he  will  never  see  it. 

Arise,  O God , lift  up  thine  hand  to  right  the  oppressed, 

That  man,  who  is  of  the  earth , may  be  terrible  no  more. 


12 


I will  hear  what  God,  the  Lord,  will  speak; 

For  he  will  speak  peace  unto  his  people. 

He  shall  judge  the  people  with  righteousness, 

And  the  poor  with  justice. 

He  shall  redeem  their  soul  from  oppression  and  violence ; 

And  precious  shall  their  blood  be  in  his  sight. 

Is  not  this  the  fast  that  I have  chosen,  saith  the  Lord, — 

To  loose  the  fetters  of  injustice;  to  untie  the  bands  of  violence; 

To  set  at  liberty  those  who  are  crushed ; to  burst  every  yoke 
asunder f 

If  from  the  midst  of  thee  thou  remove  the  yoke, 

The  pointing  finger,  and  the  speech  of  mischief, — 

Then  shall  thy  light  rise  in  darkness , 

And  thy  gloom  shall  be  as  the  noonday. 

The  eyes  of  those  who  see  shall  not  be  closed; 

The  ears  of  those  who  hear  shall  hearken; 

The  tongue  of  the  stammerers  shall  speak  plainly. 

No  more  shall  the  fool  be  called  noble, 

Nor  the  knave  any  more  be  named  gentle. 

The  noble  deviseth  noble  things, 

And  in  noble  things  will  he  continue. 

He  who  walketh  righteously  and  speaketh  uprightly, 

Who  despiseth  the  gain  of  oppressions, 

Who  stoppeth  his  ears  from  hearing  of  blood, 

And  closeth  his  eyes  from  looking  on  evil, — 

Fastnesses  of  rocks  shall  be  his  stronghold; 

He  shall  abide  on  impregnable  heights. 

Rest  in  the  Lord,  wait  patiently  for  him; 

Fret  not  thyself  because  of  the  wicked  who  prospereth  in  his  way. 
For  yet  a little  while  and  the  wicked  shall  not  be; 

Yea,  thou  shalt  diligently  consider  his  place,  and  he  shall  not  be; 

For  the  Lord  loveth  justice,  and  forsaketh  not  his  saints. 

Justice  shall  dwell  in  the  wilderness, 

And  righteousness  shall  abide  in  the  fruitful  field; 


13 

And  the  work  of  righteousness  shall  he  peace, 

And  the  effect  of  righteousness,  quietness  and  confidence  forever . 

And  God  shall  judge  between  the  nations, 

And  arbitrate  for  many  peoples; 

He  shall  make  their  officers  peace,  and  their  rulers  righteousness ; 

And  they  shall  beat  their  swords  into  plowshares, 

And  their  spears  into  pruning  hooks; 

Nation  shall  not  lift  up  sword  against  nation, 

Neither  shall  they  learn  war  any  more. 

Bishop  Potter  : 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : Mr.  Carnegie  was  to  have  presided 
at  this  meeting.  Whether  he  has  forgotten  it,  or  got  lost,  I cannot 
say.  I hope  he  has  forgotten  it,  for  Father  Lavelle  and  I were 
both  equally  shocked  the  other  day  to  see  a list  of  the  twenty- 
eight  righteous  men  in  Pittsburg,  in  which  Mr.  Carnegie’s  name 
figured,  but  neither  your  Bishop  of  Pittsburg  (turning  to 
Monsignor  Lavelle)  nor  mine ! 

Under  these  circumstances  I am  asked  first  of  all  to  intro- 
duce the  first  speaker  of  this  evening,  the  Rev.  Rabbi  Hirsch,  of 
the  Sinai  Temple  in  Chicago,  and  of  the  Chicago  University. 
(Applause.) 


The  Advent  of  the  Plough 

Dr.  Emil  G.  Hirsch 

Battle  cradled  Judah’s  early  poetry,  like  the  youthful  strains 
of  the  awakening  national  consciousness  among  other  peoples, 
running  in  melodies  singing  of  gory  victories,  and  sounding  the 
crash  of  clashing  swords,  the  whir  and  stir  of  flying  arrows.  It 
is  the  mighty  “God  of  War”  whom  it  invokes  and  proclaims, 
and  to  read  the  significance  of  the  Universe’s  revolving  and 
changeful  sceneries  the  Hebrew  bard’s  lyre  borrows  symbol  and 
sign  from  camp  and  contest.  Stars  are  an  army  sent  forth  in 
nightly  raid  to  defeat  the  stormcloud’s  daring  minions.  Tide  and 
tempest,  roaring  sea  and  ravenous  abyss,  are  giant  warriors 
leaping  to  the  fray.  Thus  mythology  and  the  nascent  nation’s 
vivid  memories  of  recent  feuds  and  broils  vie  with  each  other  to 
lend  glamour  to  the  horrors  of  the  man-wasting  battleground. 


14 

But  in  the  noontide  fullness  of  the  nation’s  maturity  Judah’s 
muse  and  ecstasy  gives  a vision  of  purer  and  softer  tints  and  tones. 
They  sing  of  peace.  They  prophesy  of  swords  turned  into  plough- 
shares. They  picture  God  enthroned  as  Judge  over  the  dwellers 
of  His  footstool.  His  decisions  render  superfluous  the  appeal  to 
arms.  The  art  of  war  is  forgotten  in  consequence.  Not  as  one 
destined  to  snatch  his  laurel  from  a torrent  of  blood,  but  as  one 
waving  the  palm  undefiled  by  grime  of  murder,  they  name  and 
hail  the  future  ruler  of  their  nation  “Prince  of  Peace.” 

The  consecration  of  Israel’s  prophetic  assurance  is  upon  us. 
The  glad  day  of  its  fulfillment  is  nearing.  Let  them  doubt  who 
will.  Ours  is  the  fervent  faith  that  vindicates  the  forevision. 

What  old  fable  told  of  Titan  parent  devouring  his  own 
offspring,  in  inverted  sequence  we  know  to  be  the  fate  of  war. 
The  children  of  war  devour  their  progenitor.  Every  device  and 
every  invention  which  the  warlike  spirit  has  cradled  have  con- 
tributed to  hold  war  itself  in  greater  restraint.  Old  scrap  iron 
are  the  proud  floating  fortresses  constructed  only  a decade  ago. 
The  dreadnoughts  of  to-day  will  be  regarded  as  puerile  toys 
to-morrow.  They  have  filled  torpedo  and  projectile  with  explos- 
ives of  terrible  potentialities  of  havoc.  Armors  are  pierced  with 
as  great  ease  as  though  they  were  glued  together  of  paper.  But 
while  shipyards  are  teeming  with  thousands  of  toilers  intent  on 
forging  the  steel  ramparts  of  the  treacherous  deep,  from  the  quiet 
laboratory  of  an  experimenter  emanates  the  fuse  that  reduces 
turrets  and  steel  cuirass  to  impotent  makeshift.  Mercenaries 
used  to  be  the  sons  of  war.  Later  only  a small  percentage  of  the 
people  under  command  of  professional  soldiers  were  drafted  into 
the  service.  Now  war  calls  to  arms  the  whole  nation.  And  this 
very  fact  puts  powerful  brakes  on  the  car  of  Juggernaut.  “Pre- 
pare war  if  thou  desire  peace.”  The  Latin’s  wisdom  is  discredited. 
The  very  futility  of  all  preparations,  the  gruesome  certainty  that 
the  breech-loaders  of  to-day  will  be  useless  to-morrow  is  one  of 
the  many  curses  which  go  with  armed  peace.  What  folly  of 
dissipation,  what  waste  of  toil  and  treasure!  Shall  human  sweat 
not  be  deemed  too  precious  to  devise  and  to  fashion  implements 
meant  for  defence  and  thus  believed  to  prevent  attack  from  with- 
out, which,  ere  they  are  finished  on  the  anvil  or  formed  in  the 
furnace,  are  outclassed  by  others  in  this  mad  rage  and  race  for 
more  thorough  preparedness  for  war  in  the  interest  of  peace? 


15 

Our  hope  is  founded  in  the  advent  of  the  plough.  By  a very 
costly  and  circuitous  route  the  sword  has  been  turned  into  a 
ploughshare  even  as  it  is  now.  Gun-metal  had  to  be  returned  to 
industry,  for  in  many  cases  and  in  an  experience  ever  repeated, 
when  employed  for  war’s  purpose  it  was,  scarcely  molded,  detected 
to  be  insufficient,  for  a rival  across  the  frontier  had  discovered 
a more  powerful  engine  which  the  day  after  again  had  to  be 
abandoned  because  another  had  hit  upon  a still  quicker  process. 
We  would  come  to  the  plough  by  a more  direct  and  less  wasteful 
road.  Yea,  the  plough  has  arrived.  If  it  is  true  that  every  war 
was  in  the  last  analysis  inspired  by  fear  of  hunger  and  not  by 
dynastic  ambition  or  national  antipathies,  then  the  larger  the 
number  of  ploughs  the  less  the  need  for  war.  Intensify  the 
productive  methods  which  coax  from  earth  the  blessings  stored 
therein  and  hunger’s  dominion  correspondingly  shrinks.  None 
need  to  starve  if  all  work  together  to  prevent  famine’s  capricious 
and  iniquitous  intrusion. 

We  hail  the  advent  of  the  plough.  It  is  the  sign  of  triumphant 
democracy.  The  toilers  have  always  had  to  pay  the  price  of  war. 
Theirs  was  chiefly  the  toll  in  blood  and  tears  and  treasure,  upon 
them  the  recoil  inevitable  of  brutality.  But  the  men  of  the  plough 
have  come  to  understand  the  fallacies  wherewith  they  have 
hitherto  been  misled  and  duped.  There  is  no  clash  between  the 
interests  of  the  toilers  in  one  country  and  those  in  another. 
Nations  are  historic  organisms  devised  to  heighten  the  efficiency 
of  humanity’s  diversified  duties  and  achievements.  Co-operation, 
not  competition,  is  the  ultimate  solvent.  With  it  as  with  the  polar 
star,  friction  will  be  minimized.  And  what  of  friction  remains 
can  be  adjusted  by  applying  to  nations  the  principles  established 
in  all  civilized  lands  to  the  relations  of  individuals.  If  the  courts 
are  competent  to  maintain  the  social  equilibrium  between  different 
contestants  and  litigants  in  one  country  shall  we  despair  of  inter- 
national tribunals’  efficiency  in  making  for  equilibrium  among  the 
nations?  If  all  nations  were  united  would  one  single  nation  dare 
reject  the  decree? 

The  plough  confers  moral  blessings  as  rich  as  ever  were  those 
imputed  to  war.  Does  industry  try  men’s  souls  less  searchingly 
than  does  war?  Will  we  lapse  into  hopeless  materialism  if  we 
are  spared  the  periodical  crises  that  urge  sacrifice  of  one  for  the 
larger  good  of  others  and  many?  The  complexity  of  modern  life 


i6 

consecrated  to  the  development  of  man  and  the  resources  of  his 
home  is  such  that  heroism,  altruism,  self-sacrifice,  high  resolve 
and  strenuous  effort  are  conditions  of  self-maintenai,  :e.  Con- 
structive co-operation  in  all  those  things  that  make  for  th : human- 
izing of  men  dispenses  strength  as  robust  and  virility  as  elastic 
as  ever  did  destructive  warfare. 

The  vision  of  the  prophet  speaks  of  industrial  conditions 
combining  economic  independence  with  social  co-operation.  The 
freedom  of  every  individual  through  and  in  co-operation  will 
indeed  lend  to  the  establishing  of  God’s  throne  among  men  and 
above  the  nations.  A dream  this?  No,  a forevision.  Vision  is 
a forerunner,  always,  of  achievement.  Let  nations  dream  of 
peace  and  peace  will  be  sure  of  consummation.  The  hands  that 
guide  the  plough  carry  credentials  of  nobility  and  strength  less 
doubtful  than  do  the  fingers  that  pull  the  trigger.  Not  of  inane 
impossibilities  have  they  raved  who  foretold  the  coming  of  the 
day  when  nations  shall  no  longer  learn  the  art  of  war.  Seated 
each  one  under  his  own  vine  and  fig-tree  in  independence  and 
freedom,  none  will  covet  the  others’  possessions,  but  all  will  bow 
to  the  decision  of  the  Highest  Judge,  whose  throne  is  pillared  on 
Justice  and  whose  sceptre  is  tipped  with  Righteousness. 

One  looking  down  upon  us  from  some  distant  planet  might 
easily  be  misled  into  the  belief  that  terrestrial  nations  are  even 
at  this  late  day,  twenty  centuries  after  the  birth  of  the  child  of 
Bethlehem,  still  believers  in  polytheism.  When  national  hysteria 
seizes  hold  of  our  would-be  civilized  nations,  the  truth  which  one 
of  Israel’s  prophets  urged  upon  his  people,  the  unity  of  God 
and  the  oneness  of  humanity,  seems  indeed  to  be  curtained  from 
the  vision  of  the  peoples  preparing  to  spring  at  one  another’s 
throats  or  actually  engaged  in  the  conflict.  Each  of  the  contestants 
calls  upon  God  to  bless  his  arms,  apparently  oblivious  of  the 
solemn  and  sublime  certainty  that  as  even  Mohammed  knew 
‘‘the  East  is  the  Lord’s  and  the  West  is  His  also.”  Is  there  one 
God  to  watch  over  the  soldiers  of  France  and  another  to  care 
for  the  regiments  of  Germany?  War  thus  does  not  only  exact 
heavy  toll  in  treasure  and  life  and  limb,  it  also  undermines  the 
very  foundations  of  religion’s  sanctuaries.  It  throws  doubt  on 
the  essential  verities  of  the  religions  that  at  least  with  their  lips 
if  not  with  their  hearts  the  peoples  of  Christendom  are  professing. 
Should  they  not  at  least  remember  the  obligation  which  the  seer 


1 7 

of  Jerusalem  would  have  his  followers  rejoice  in : “These  with 
swords — yet  we  in  the  name  of  our  God. — Have  we  not  all  one 
Father?  Hath  not  one  God  made  us  all?  Why  then  should 
brother  deal  treacherously  with  brother  ?” 

The  records  of  war  often  tell  of  swelling  hymns  entoned 
after  the  day  of  battle  by  victorious  hosts  eager  to  return  thanks 
to  the  God  who  led  them  through  the  fiery  furnace  to  the  terrible 
hour  of  triumph.  That  such  homage  paid  the  divine  arbiter  lacks 
not  impressiveness  may  be  conceded.  The  battle  hymn  of  the 
reformation  leaping  to  sound  from  tent  to  tent  and  from  camp- 
fire to  the  fireless  outposts  and  solitary  pickets,  is  a scene  that 
even  in  description  retains  much  of  its  power  to  move  the  distant 
or  late  born  onlooker.  Yet  even  so  the  sublimity  of  the  act  of 
grateful  worship  is  eclipsed  by  the  thought  cloaked  into  legend 
in  the  books  of  old  Rabbis.  According  to  them,  after  the  fearful 
day  that  sent  Pharaoh  and  his  army  to  a watery  grave,  the  angels 
in  heaven  began  singing  anthems  of  triumph  and  thanksgiving. 
But  God  hushed  them  into  awful  silence,  saying:  “Know  ye  not 
that  my  children,  fashioned  by  my  hand,  have  been  submerged 
in  the  Red  Sea’s  wrath,  and  ye  would  sing  me  praises?”  Yea, 
every  battle  victory  is  purchased  by  a ransom  which  God  Himself 
has  to  pay. 

His  children’s  life  is  taken.  To  sing  Him  praises  because 
victory  has  perched  on  our  bayonets  wears  close  similarity  to 
blasphemy.  If  all  nations  have  but  one  God,  how  may  His 
worshippers  pray  that  He  be  with  their  nation’s  brigades  and  not 
also  'with  those  of  their  adversaries  ? 

But  will  not  peace  rob  us  of  our  manliness?  Will  we  not 
sink  hopelessly  into  the  mire  of  materialism  if  never  again  man- 
kind will  have  to  pass  through  the  hurricane  that  searches  men’s 
souls?  Industry  has  magnet  as  strong  to  draw  out  the  gold  of 
fortitude  and  sacrifice  from  the  soul  of  men  as  ever  had  war. 
Would  one  withhold  to  womanhood  the  tribute  due  heroism? 
And  yet  true  women  never  wore  the  Amazon’s  accoutrements  or 
rushed  forth  to  battle.  Every  Madonna  breathed  on  canvas  by 
master  genius  proclaims  the  heroism  of  maternity,  and  in  that 
heroism  woman  has  saved  the  race  for  its  nobler  duties  and 
sublimer  destinies.  The  ferocity  and  brutalism  of  men  often  have 
menaced  the  best  treasures  which  God  has  vouchsafed  to  the  dust- 
born.  Thousands  and  thousands  in  the  battalions  of  peace  face 


i8 

death  and  danger  almost  daily  as  they  pursue  the  path  of  their 
vocation.  Yet  of  them  there  is  neither  song  nor  story.  In  the 
bowels  of  the  earth  the  poorly  compensated  miner  throws  down 
the  gauntlet  to  a mightier  foe  than  ever  met  soldier  on  battle- 
field. Yet  his  is  no  glory.  It  is  indeed  not  true  that  men  and 
mankind  will  lapse  into  brutalism  and  forfeit  their  power  to  lay 
down  life  and  limb  in  the  service  of  ideals  and  duties  if  war  shall 
forever  be  leashed.  The  contrary  is  the  truth.  War  has  always 
fathered  brutalism.  Long  after  the  cannons  have  ceased  to  roar 
murder  finds  furious  hands  to  do  its  unhuman  bidding.  Passions 
that  are  low  are  aroused  by  the  frenzy  of  the  contest  and  are  kept 
at  fever-point  by  the  coarseness,  the  inhumanity  of  the  discipline 
and  associations  of  the  march.  Then  war  estranges  the  children 
of  men.  Long  after  the  conclusion  of  peace  resentments  lurk 
behind.  France  still  looks  askance  at  Germany,  though  more  than 
three  decades  have  passed  since  their  armies  last  measured  swords 
on  historic  fields.  The  sword  indeed  estranges,  the  plough  brings 
men  nearer. 

Last  year  more  than  one  thousand  French  miners  were 
suddenly  entombed.  The  jealousy  of  the  sprites  that  stand 
guard  over  the  treasures  left  by  world  conflagrations  in  the  dark 
caverns  of  the  planet  had  once  more  found  its  opportunity  to 
remind  man  that  as  yet  his  mastership  was  not  absolute.  Then 
from  across  the  frontier  came  at  early  dawn  a small  company  of 
German  miners.  They  had  heard  of  the  imprisonment  of  their 
brothers  and  had  come  to  risk  their  lives  in  the  endeavor  to  bring 
them  aid.  That  one  act  of  peace  has  done  more  to  remind  the 
noble  French  nation  of  the  brotherly  ties  that  ought  to  bind  and 
hold  in  unity  all  the  sons  of  God  on  earth  than  warlike  pomp 
and  circumstance  and  petty  nationalism  and  idolizing  patriotism 
ever  after  will  make  them  forget.  Ah,  the  plough,  emblem  of 
man’s  peaceful  dominion  over  nature’s  forces  and  over  himself, 
is  the  sign  in  which  nations  will  come  to  learn  and  read  the 
unities  and  humanities  always  menaced  by  the  sword.  “Right- 
eousness exalted  a nation.”  A righteous  cause  may  always  be 
submitted  to  a righteous  judge.  God  will  decide  among  the 
nations  and  they  shall  learn  war  no  more.  Amen.  Amen. 


19 


Bishop  Potter  : 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : There  are  two  large  meetings 
within  a block  or  two  of  this  hall,  to  one  of  which  I have  been 
appointed  to  go  and  speak ; therefore  I shall  take  the  opportunity 
of  saying  at  this  moment  a few  words  which  I had  hoped  to  say 
a little  later.  I am  glad  to  say  them  now,  because  I am  sure 
that  I express  the  mind  of  everybody  within  this  hall  when  I say 
to  Rabbi  Hirsch  that  he  has  struck  the  precise  keynote  which 
ought,  I think,  and  I am  sure  you  think,  to  dominate  a great 
meeting  like  this.  And  I beg  you  all  to  believe,  ladies  and  gentle- 
men, that  your  presence  here  to-night  has  a very  high  and  august 
significance.  We  are  not  here  merely  for  our  own  pleasure,  we 
are  here  as  representing  the  people  of  the  United  States  of 
America,  to  say  to  the  whole  round  world  that  we  are  on  the  side 
of  peace,  and  shall  use  our  endeavors  so  far  as  we  can  to  make 
it  a realization.  In  the  family,  in  the  school-room,  in  the  street — 
wherever  we  can  make  our  example  or  our  speech  understood 
of  our  fellowmen,  our  aim  shall  be  in  the  direction  of  that  high 
purpose,  which  is  the  purpose  of  the  World’s  Peace  Conference. 

I had  the  pleasure, — if  one  can  describe  it  in  that  way, — 
of  hearing  this  afternoon,  by  an  eminent  Divine  of  my  own 
Communion,  a sermon  in  the  interest  of  war.  I had  the  pleasure 
of  sitting  under  the  eloquence  which  baptized  your  purpose  and 
mine  in  coming  here  to-night  as  “hysterical  sentimentalism.”  I 
hope  it  is  something  more  sacred  and  more  ennobling  than  that ! 

I have  been  profoundly  thankful  to  our  dear  brother,  Rabbi 
Hirsch,  for  the  line  of  his  remarks  this  evening,  because  he  had 
pointed  out  the  steady  growth  and  progress  of  a great  people, 
out  of  such  elementary  ideas  such  as  were  the  elementary 
ideas  of  Israel  to  the  time  of  Isaiah,  when  the  noblest  prophecy 
that  the  prophet  could  utter  was  that  men  should  beat  their 
swords  into  ploughshares  and  their  spears  into  pruning- 
hooks,  and  that  the  time  should  come  when  nations  should  not 
learn  war  any  more.  Do  you  realize  what  that  word  means? 
Have  you  recognized  that  the  progress  of  invention,  and 
machinery,  and  the  ingenuity  of  men,  married  to  the  cleverness 
of  mechanism,  has  made  every  war,  and  every  instrument  of  war, 
infinitely  more  destructive  and  more  menacing  than  it  was  one 
hundred  years  ago?  Father  Lavelle  was  just  telling  me  a moment 
ago  of  an  invention  that  either  has  been  or  is  to  be  completed 


20 


that  would  destroy  two  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  men  in  fifteen 
minutes ! Stop  and  reflect,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  upon  the 
appalling  picture  which  that  presents.  Try  to  realize  that  every 
soldier  in  the  land, — and  I am  a brother  of  two  men  who  served 
in  the  late  Civil  War,  and  am  not  likely  therefore  to  underestimate 
the  value  of  the  soldier  or  of  his  service, — but  remember  that 
every  soldier  here,  or  in  Russia,  or  in  Germany,  or  in  France, 
or  anywhere  else,  represents  first  of  all  a non-producer,  of  whom 
there  are  more  than  a million  in  Germany ; — a non-producer  who 
must  be  clothed,  fed  and  generally  cared  for  by  you  and  me; — 
that  out  of  our  pockets  come  the  taxes,  and  out  of  our  funds  the 
resources  to  build  a great  iron  cruiser  that  costs  eight  millions 
of  dollars,  or  that  supports  the  troops  in  any  garrison  in  any 
country.  God  forbid  that  we  should  recklessly  precipitate  the 
abandonment  either  of  the  garrison  or  the  armed  cruiser.  But, 
my  dear  sir,  no  achievement  in  the  history  of  the  Communion 
you  represent,  in  South  America,  approaches  that  of  those  two 
bishops  in  Argentina  and  Chili  who,  when  these  two  great 
peoples  were  expending  every  dollar  at  their  command  to  build 
ships  of  war,  and  collecting  men  at  arms,  succeeded  at  length 
in  having  the  question  of  the  boundary  line  between  Chili  and 
the  Argentine  Republic,  which  was  about  to  be  fought  out 
because  of  the  question  of  the  right  of  possession  to  some  eighty 
thousand  acres  of  land,  referred  to  a sovereign, — the  sovereign 
of  Great  Britain, — who,  in  turn,  appointed  a commission  of 
arbitration,  whose  decision  was  accepted  by  both  the  great 
peoples  concerned.  If  that  can  be  attained,  ladies  and  gentlemen, 
if  the  questions  which  have  made  nations,  like  wild  beasts,  fly 
at  each  other’s  throats  for  the  last  two  hundred  and  fifty  years, 
can  be  referred  to  peaceful  arbitration,  let  us  thank  God  for  the 
Hague  Conference ! 

And,  let  us  feel  a proper  pride  that  the  man  who  built  the 
structure  in  which  that  conference  is  to  meet  is  an  American 
citizen,  and  let  us  by  our  determined  hostility  to  every  note  of 
war  hasten  the  triumph  of  universal  peace!  (Great  applause.) 

Right  Rev.  Monsignor  M.  J.  Lavelle,  V.G.,  Rector  of  St. 
Patrick’s  Cathedral, will  now  give  us  ArchbishopFarley’s  message. 

Monsignor  Lavelle  : 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : Archbishop  Farley,  although  not 
with  you  to-night  in  body,  has  neither  forgotten  nor  been  lost. 


21 


(Laughter.)  He  was  obliged  to  go  to  Washington  on  Wednes- 
day last  to  attend  the  annual  meeting  of  the  archbishops  of  the 
country  that  is  held  in  the  National  Capitol  every  year  in  the 
second  week  after  Easter.  He  fully  expected  to  have  returned 
last  night,  but  he  found  on  Friday  that  his  business  would  not  be 
finished  in  time  for  him  to  reach  here  before  Tuesday  or  Wednes- 
day of  this  week.  Consequently  he  sent  on  the  address  which  he 
had  prepared,  and  asked  me  as  his  representative  vicar  to  come 
before  you  to-night  and  “rattle”  in  his  shoes  as  well  as  I might 
be  able  to,  and  to  present  his  greeting,  his  compliments,  and  his 
regrets  for  not  being  present,  also  his  hearty  hope  and  prayer 
that  the  result  of  this  Congress  in  New  York  will  have  the  effect 
of  strengthening  the  arms  and  the  influences  of  the  Hague 
Tribunal,  and  bring  about  at  the  earliest  possible  moment  the 
peace  of  the  whole  world.  (Great  applause.) 

Before  I begin,  if  one  who  is  only  a representative  might 
be  allowed  a word  on  his  own  part,  I would  add  a gloss,  or  an 
explanation  to  an  incident  that  I related  to  Bishop  Potter  just 
before  he  arose  to  address  you,  and  which  he  quoted  in  the 
course  of  his  speech.  Some  four  or  five  years  ago  it  was 
narrated  in  one  of  the  daily  papers  that  a Frenchman  had  claimed 
the  discovery  of  an  implement  of  war, — a machine, — that  would 
kill  two  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  men  in  fifteen  minutes,  and 
the  newspaper  account  related  that  he  had  offered  it  to  his  own 
government,  which  refused  to  accept  it  at  the  price  which  he  put 
upon  it,  but  that  he  sold  it  afterward  to  the  German  Government. 
Eventually,  I think,  it  has  been  proved  that  the  device,  if  it  were 
attempted  at  all,  was  a failure,  but  it  might  not  be  such  a very 
great  evil  for  the  cause  of  peace  if  it  were  really  a positive  success, 
because  as  I can  conceive  it  there  are  three  ways  in  which  the 
peace  of  the  world  can  be  brought  about.  One  of  these  is  by 
the  arbitration  of  which  the  Hague  Tribunal  is  the  exponent  and 
promoter,  and  through  the  consent  of  men  to  the  decisions  of  a 
competent  tribunal.  That  is  the  nearest,  and  as  we  stand  at  the 
present  time,  the  most  hopeful  aspect  of  prospective  peace  that 
has  come  before  the  world  as  yet. 

The  second  possible  way  is  by  that  means  to  which  Rabbi 
Hirsch  alluded  so  eloquently,  which  reproduces  the  words  of 


22 


Tennyson  at  the  close  of  Locksley  Hall,  when  he  dreamed  of 
the  time: 

“Till  the  war-drum  throbb’d  no  longer,  and  the  battle-flags  were 
furl’d 

In  the  Parliament  of  man,  the  Federation  of  the  world.” 

The  third  means  might  be, — and  if  it  would  come,  consid- 
ering human  nature  as  it  is, — it  might  be  the  surest  and  most 
permanent  certainty  of  peace;  that  is,  the  day  when  war  would 
become  an  absolute  impossibility ; when  there  would  be  no  danger 
of  people  breaking  away  from  an  arbitration  tribunal ; no  possi- 
bility of  rebellion  in  this  federation  of  the  world,  because  each 
party  would  have  in  its  hands  a weapon  that  would  make  it  as 
strong  for  destruction  as  the  other.  Through  a mighty  engine 
of  that  kind  the  weakest  would  be  as  strong  as  the  strongest,  and 
the  bully  and  the  robber-leaders  of  the  world  would  be  cowed 
before  those  who,  though  weak,  were  right.  It  is  not  at  all 
impossible  that  this  might  be  the  real  and  most  complete  solution 
of  the  question  of  universal  peace  that  could  come  upon  this  world, 
which  has  suffered  so  long  from  the  dread  atrocities  of  war. 

With  your  kind  permission  I will  now  read  to  you  the  Arch- 
bishop’s address: 


Universal  Peace 

Most  Reverend  John  M.  Farley,  D.D., 

War  is  so  great  an  evil  that  one  of  the  world’s  greatest 
generals  described  it  with  laconic  eloquence  as  the  most  perfect 
state  of  human  misery.  There  is  wanting  to  it  no  horror,  moral 
or  material. 

Its  benefits,  if  any,  are  indirect  and  uncertain;  its  evils  are 
immediate,  inevitable  and  universal — vitiation  of  human  char- 
acter, waste  of  life  and  gain,  arrest  of  human  progress,  injustice 
to  the  helpless  and  innocent,  the  permanent  legacies  of  hate, 
and  all  the  fiercest  and  most  ruinous  passions  of  the  human 
breast.  Its  genuine  symbol  is  the  storm  that  blots  out  in  a brief 
space  the  harvest,  the  home,  even  life  itself,  leaving  behind  it 
desolation,  despair,  and  death. 

So  true  is  this  that,  at  all  times,  men  have  imagined  perfect 
happiness  to  be  some  state  of  universal  peace,  a golden  age  long 
past  or  to  dawn.  “Peace  on  earth  to  men,”  the  complement  of 
“Glory  to  God  on  high,”  was  the  greeting  which  heaven  sent  to 


23 

earth  in  the  most  solemn  hour  of  the  world’s  history.  Could  we 
abolish  war  in  the  twentieth  century  we  should  hand  down  to 
posterity  an  earth  made  perfect  as  a dwelling  place  for  man. 

We  owe  a debt  of  gratitude,  therefore,  to  all  who  devote 
themselves  to  this  Christlike  purpose.  It  is  the  duty  of  every 
citizen  to  respond  to  their  generous  appeal,  and  to  contribute 
what  is  in  him  to  the  accomplishment  of  their  aim.  It  is  an  aim 
that  uplifts  and  ennobles  all  human  nature,  and  tends  to  reveal 
in  man  spiritual  heights  and  depths  that  get  obscured  in  those 
brutal  conflicts,  from  which  he  emerges  always  more  shattered  in 
his  spiritual  than  in  his  physical  life. 

We  must  all  admit  that  even  if  we  cannot  totally  abolish  war, 
much  can  be  done  and  is  being  done  to  mitigate  its  horrors.  The 
people  of  the  world  should  be  grateful  to  all  who  have  in  any  way 
contributed,  as  individuals,  rulers,  or  associations  to  improve  the 
conditions  of  warfare,  i.e.,  to  strip  it  of  its  barbarian  character, 
and  emphasize  the  dignity  and  rights  of  man  even  on  the  field  of 
battle. 

I am  not  prepared  to  say  that  we  shall  ever  entirely  remove 
that  dread  scourge  from  society;  but  I believe  it  can  be  notably 
diminished  in  frequency  and  mitigated  in  its  conduct.  If  this 
mitigation  of  the  brutalities  of  war  is  to  continue  and  is  one  day 
to  cease  among  men,  it  will  be  through  the  influence  of  two  great 
moral  forces,  Education  and  Religion. 

We  are  told  by  the  wise  men  in  the  daily  press  and  in  our 
universities  that  the  only  true  and  sufficient  cause  for  war  in 
modern  times  is  the  desire  to  retain  areas  of  commercial  influence, 
or  acquire  new  ones,  or  to  oust  others  from  such  as  we  have 
learned  to  desire.  If  this  be  the  case,  whatever  will  serve  to 
appease  the  root  of  desire,  to  create  a spirit  of  moderation  and 
contentment,  to  enlarge  the  horizon  of  the  heart,  and  show  it  new 
regions  of  enjoyment,  certain  and  abiding,  must  prove  a universal 
benefit.  If  in  all  the  nations  that  make  up  modern  Christendom 
the  youthful  generations  were  taught  in  all  earnestness  the  law 
of  Christian  holiness  and  rectitude  of  life,  and  made  to  know  the 
divine  exemplar  of  that  life,  we  should  have  begun  the  formation 
of  a Christian  Public  Opinion  that  would  in  time  discredit  many 
of  the  motives  and  occasions  from  which  wars  have  in  the  past 
originated. 

I am  of  the  opinion  that  we  ought  to  appeal  more  directly  to 


24 

the  influence  of  all  religious  bodies.  In  the  individual,  peace  is  a 
natural  fruit  of  the  religious  sentiment.  Logically,  therefore,  it 
should  be  the  mental  habit  of  a society,  that,  speaking  in  a very 
broad  sense,  calls  itself  Christian,  knowing  no  higher  ideals  than 
those  of  the  Prince  of  Peace.  Hence  I read  with  pleasure  that 
Doctor  Holls,  the  historian  of  the  Hague  Conference,  justly 
praises  Radbertus’s  fine  definition  of  the  art  of  politics — “the 
royal  art  of  ascertaining  and  accomplishing  the  will  of  God.,, 
Yes,  “Christian  justice,  the  maxims  of  the  Gospel,  the  fear  of 
God  are  the  only  true  basis  of  a lasting  peace.”  (Cardinal  Ram- 
polla  in  replying  to  the  invitation  of  the  Emperor  of  Russia  to 
take  part  in  the  Hague  Conference.)  Public  opinion  we  must 
cultivate,  but  any  legitimate  and  durable  public  opinion  must 
eventually  have  a basis  of  religion.  Otherwise  it  will  be  only  a 
series  of  popular  ebullitions,  a form  of  psychology  of  the  mob, 
that  to-day  shouts  for  “Liberty”  and  to-morrow  goes  drunk  over 
its  violent  extinction. 

We  ought  to  welcome  all  organized  religious  efforts  in  the 
interest  of  a general  peace,  for  all  such  effort  is  essentially 
Christian  and  supremely  humane  and  uplifting. 

The  real  evil  of  our  modern  industrial  and  commercial  condi- 
tions is  the  selfishness  they  tend  to  engender.  Why  should  we 
ignore  the  most  powerful  solvent  of  selfishness  that  has  ever  been 
discovered,  the  religious  sentiment? 

I believe  with  all  my  soul  that  until  we  recognize  openly  the 
moral  power  and  authority  of  religion,  not  of  the  vague  individual 
sentiment,  but  of  organized  religion — our  efforts  for  a universal 
peace  will  accomplish  but  an  imperfect  result. 

I shall  not,  therefore,  entirely  surprise  anyone  if  in  connection 
with  the  profound  influence  of  religion  in  all  that  tends  to  create 
and  preserve  a state  of  peace  I call  attention  to  the  continuous 
existence  of  a famous  tribunal  of  peace — the  Holy  See  at  Rome. 

Its  services  in  the  past  are  so  well  known  that  all  impartial 
historians,  even  such  as  do  not  recognize  its  spiritual  authority, 
agree  that  for  centuries  it  was  a successful  court  of  final  resort 
for  countless  conflicts.  The  only  practical  international  law  for 
centuries  was  the  Gospel  of  Christ  as  preached  by  its  legatees  to 
emperors  and  kings. 

Through  centuries  of  selfish  feudalism,  when  all  Europe  was 
splintered  into  countless  little  states,  the  Holy  See  was  the  only 


25 

external  force  they  bowed  to  and  habitually  invoked  as  unselfish, 
independent,  courageous,  beloved  by  the  poor  and  weak,  and 
feared  by  the  rapacious  and  powerful. 

That  tribunal  still  exists.  Lord  Stanley  in  the  House  of 
Lords,  July  25,  1887,  thus  referred  to  it,  when  the  question  of 
International  Arbitration  was  under  discussion : “Such  a court 
exists  already,  the  Court  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome ; all  Continental 
Europe  was  disposed  to  recognize  it  as  the  proper  arbiter  when 
war  was  threatened  between  nations.  He  called  attention  to  the 
happy  settlement  of  the  Caroline  Islands  by  Leo  XIII,  whereby 
war  was  averted  between  Germany  and  Spain.  “The  Code  of  the 
Law  of  Nations/’  he  continued,  “drawn  up  at  Lille  by  Catholic 
savants  in  November,  1886,  could  easily  be  accepted  by  England, 
which,  following  the  example  of  Germany,  need  not  hesitate  to 
trust  the  impartiality  of  the  Pope.” 

The  Holy  See  is  still  the  working  head  of  the  great  Catholic 
body,  over  256,000,000  of  souls;  and  its  moral  authority  was 
never  greater.  All  these  countless  millions  would  surely  welcome 
the  recognition  of  the  Holy  See  as  a factor  in  International 
Arbitration. 

It  stands  forth  universally  venerated  as  a divine  represen- 
tative committed  to  the  works  and  the  interests  of  peace  by  the 
nature  and  history  of  its  office,  at  the  head  of  a great  working 
system  of  international  religious  administration  which  permits 
it  to  reach  rapidly  and  efficiently  the  minds  and  the  hearts 
of  whole  peoples  and  races. 

I am  not  prepared  to  say  just  how  the  Holy  See  might  again 
take  its  place  as  a factor  in  the  work  of  universal  peace,  or  how 
the  Christian  world  shall  resurrect  a tribunal  that  was  once  its 
pride  and  honor. 

It  is  certainly  significant  enough  that  when  Czar  Nicholas 
first  proposed  an  International  Tribunal  of  Peace  he  invited  the 
Holy  See  to  take  part  in  the  proceedings  and  that  the  Queen  of 
Holland  wrote  personally  to  Leo  XIII,  requesting  his  co-opera- 
tion. 

I think  I can  safely  say  that  if  the  Holy  See  were  no  longer 
excluded  from  this  noble  and  eminently  religious  enterprise  the 
thirteen  or  more  millions  of  American  Catholics  would  at  once 
take  a livelier  interest  in  the  movement  for  the  abolition  of  war. 


26 


It  would  appear  to  them  as  more  than  a Utopian  scheme,  as  some- 
thing practicable,  and  in  a large  measure  attainable. 

I regret  exceedingly  that  I cannot  be  with  you  to-night.  I 
give  you  my  best  wishes,  assuring  you  that  I am  present  in  spirit, 
and  that  my  hope  and  prayer  is  that  the  work  in  New  York  this 
week  may  be  a large  factor  in  bringing  about  the  approach  of 
universal  peace  throughout  the  world. 


From  Stereograph,  Copyright  1907,  by  Underwood  & Underwood,  New  'York. 


Good-will  Among  Men 


27 


SECOND  SESSION 

OPENING  MEETING 

Carnegie  Hall 

Monday  Afternoon,  April  Fifteenth,  at  3 

ANDREW  CARNEGIE  Presiding 

Mr.  Carnegie  : 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  You  know  it  was  written  that, 
“He  who  governs  himself  is  greater  than  he  who  governs  a city.” 
But,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  that  was  written  before  they  knew 
anything  about  Greater  New  York.  (Laughter.) 

We  have  with  us  this  afternoon  the  Mayor,  who  has  kindly 
consented  to  appear  and  welcome  our  guests.  A man  who  has 
governed  the  city  well  (applause),  honestly,  and  who  will  retire 
from  office  possessing  the  confidence  of  all  parties,  and  with  a 
spotless  reputation  (applause).  I have  pleasure  in  presenting  to 
you  His  Honor,  the  Mayor  of  Greater  New  York.  (Applause.) 

The  Spirit  of  Nationality 

Hon.  George  B.  McClellan 

I am  exceedingly  gratified  to  have  this  opportunity  of  meeting 
so  many  of  you  who  have  done,  and  are  doing  and  will  continue 
to  do,  so  much  for  the  purpose  which  you  have  met  to  further. 

This  assemblage,  presided  over  by  one  of  the  foremost  citizens 
of  the  United  States,  under  his  inspiration,  is  not  striving  for  the 
impossible,  but  seeking  by  practical  methods  to  serve  the  cause  of 
international  peace  with  honor. 

That  a movement  for  universal  peace  is  considered  seriously, 
that  many  practical  men  believe  that  it  may,  in  God’s  good  time 
and  in  God’s  own  way,  come  to  fruition,  is  because  of  a new  spirit 
that  influences  mankind. 

The  dream  of  peace  is  no  new  thing.  It  was  dreamed  two 
centuries  ago,  and  the  dreamers  awoke  to  the  stern  reality  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  balance  of  power,  which  was  but  magniloquence 
for  land-lust,  and  the  glorification  of  highway  robbery.  A century 
later  Castlereagh  dreamed  of  disarmament,  and  awoke  to  join 


28 

the  concert  of  Europe,  which,  ignoring  natural  boundaries,  race, 
religion  and  nationality,  existed  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
status  quo,  which  had  been  reached  by  the  strict  application  of  the 
doctrine,  “to  the  victor  belongs  the  spoils.” 

The  century  which  was  born  amid  the  loud  acclaim  of  the 
universal  brotherhood  of  man,  died  with  Europe  one  vast,  armed 
camp.  And  yet  the  century  which  saw  at  its  beginning  Marengo 
and  Austerlitz,  saw  at  its  close  the  meeting  of  the  first  Hague 
Conference. 

The  tattered  soldiers  of  the  French  Revolution  sowed  a seed 
which  under  the  great  Napoleon  took  root  and  grew,  and  bore 
a flower,  the  spirit  of  nationality,  which  has  revolutionized  the 
world,  enduring  all  things,  doing  all  things,  daring  all  things. 

The  nation  is  after  all  nothing  more  than  a vast  aggregation 
of  individuals  held  together  by  a community  of  interests,  with 
all  the  breadth  and  the  limitations,  with  all  the  strength  and  the 
weaknesses,  with  all  the  virtues  and  the  vices  of  its  component 
parts. 

Without  community  of  interests  States  may  flourish  per- 
sonified by  their  sovereigns,  and  held  together  by  force  of  arms, 
but  the  spirit  of  nationality  can  exist  only  where  purposes,  ambi- 
tions and  aspirations  are  shared  by  all.  And  because  of  this  spirit 
the  nations  themselves,  and  not  the  sovereigns,  are  the  dominant 
factors  in  world  politics.  In  these  days  of  triumphant  democracy 
sovereignty  is  in  the  people,  and  it  is  their  will  which  sways  the 
world. 

I am  one  of  those  who  believe  that  the  world  was  better 
yesterday  than  it  was  the  day  before ; is  better  to-day  than  it  was 
yesterday,  and  with  God’s  blessing,  will  be  better  to-morrow  than 
it  is  to-day.  Mortal  man  is  by  instinct  a fighting  animal.  Were 
he  not  so  he  would  never  have  survived  in  the  fierce  struggle  for 
existence,  and  would  never  have  reached  his  present  state  of 
civilization.  But  fighting  animal  though  he  is,  he  realizes  the 
advantages  of  peace,  and  as  the  world  grows  better  he  becomes 
more  willing  to  hesitate  before  sacrificing  peace  for  war.  You 
can  no  more  secure  universal  peace  by  resolution  than  you  can 
make  mankind  perfect  by  act  of  Congress. 

With  the  individual  sinner  a declaration  of  reform  is  often 
conclusive  evidence  of  a sincere  change  of  heart,  but  with  the 
chanceries  of  the  world,  works  meet  for  repentance  must  be 


29 

brought  forth  before  they  can  be  believed.  It  is  not  so  much  a 
matter  of  world  importance  what  those  taking  part  in  international 
conferences  agree  to  do  or  not  to  do,  as  it  is  whether  or  not  after 
adjournment  they  really  try  to  keep  the  peace. 

There  is  no  government  on  earth  that  is  not  influenced  more 
or  less  by  public  opinion.  If  governments  are  to  be  made  to 
appreciate  thoroughly  the  advantages  of  peace,  then  the  peoples 
of  the  earth  must  be  taught  to  appreciate  its  blessings.  If  the 
nations  sincerely  desire  peace,  there  is  scarcely  a difference  that 
can  arise  among  them  that  cannot  be  adjusted  by  peaceful  arbi- 
tration. 

Your  duty,  as  that  of  every  one  who  knows  the  difference 
between  national  honor  and  national  land-lust,  between  true 
courage  and  swash-buckling,  is  to  convince  the  world  that  man 
has  a higher,  nobler  mission  than  to  be  forever  at  his  brother’s 
throat;  that  war  should  be  resorted  to  only  as  a last  desperate 
remedy  for  injustice  and  oppression.  The  task  which  you  have 
set  yourselves,  and  which  can  be  accomplished,  is  to  cultivate  a 
spirit  of  sober  common  sense  among  men,  a sense  which  will 
cause  them  to  think  twice  before  going  to  extremes,  and  to  hesitate 
before  glorifying  the  war  spirit.  To  such  a public  opinion  govern- 
ments must  bow.  Putting  into  practice  their  high-sounding 
professions  of  mutual  good-will  they  must,  with  due  regard  for 
each  other’s  interests,  live  in  harmony  one  with  another. 

The  people  of  this  city  have  always  been  among  the  first  to 
take  up  arms  in  defence  of  the  flag,  when  it  has  been  in  danger. 
But  they  believe  that  our  country  can  best  be  served  by  a national 
policy  so  just  and  so  righteous  that  the  flag  will  never  be  assailed. 
They  believe  that  justice  and  righteousness  require  a spirit  of 
tolerance,  of  respect  and  of  amity  among  the  nations,  a spirit 
which  will  not  only  insure  the  peace  of  the  world  but  will  permit 
man  in  his  evolution  to  move  always  onward  and  upward. 

The  people  of  New  York  believe  that  this  Congress  is  a part 
of  a great  world  movement  toward  a better  international  under- 
standing, and  that  its  influence  must  be  felt  for  good.  Through 
me,  their  Mayor,  they  wish  you  God-speed  upon  your  mission, 
and  bid  you  welcome  to  their  city. 


30 


Letter  from  President  Roosevelt 

Read  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Congress,  Robert  Erskine  Ely. 

I much  regret  my  inability  to  be  present  with  you.  Mr.  Root 
will  speak  to  you  at  length,  and  no  man  in  the  country  is  better 
fitted  than  he  to  address  you  on  the  subject  you  have  so  much  at 
heart;  for  no  man  has  in  keener  or  more  practical  fashion,  or 
with  a nobler  disinterestedness  of  purpose,  used  the  national 
power  to  further  what  I believe  to  be  the  national  purpose  of 
bringing  nearer  the  day  when  the  peace  of  righteousness,  the 
peace  of  justice,  shall  obtain  among  nations. 

In  this  letter  of  mine,  I can  do  little  more  than  wish  you  and 
your  association  God-speed  in  your  efforts.  My  sympathy  with 
the  purpose  you  have  at  heart  is  both  strong  and  real,  and  by  right 
of  it  I shall  make  to  you  some  suggestions  as  to  the  practical 
method  for  accomplishing  the  ends  we  all  of  us  have  in  view.  First 
and  foremost,  I beseech  you  to  remember  that  tho  it  is  our 
bounden  duty  to  work  for  peace,  yet  it  is  even  more  our  duty 
to  work  for  righteousness  and  justice.  It  is  “Righteousness  that 
exalteth  a nation/’  and  tho  normally  peace  is  the  handmaid  of 
righteousness,  yet,  if  they  are  ever  at  odds,  it  is  righteousness 
whose  cause  we  must  espouse.  In  the  second  place,  I again 
earnestly  ask  that  all  good  and  earnest  men  who  believe  strongly 
in  this  cause,  but  who  have  not  themselves  to  bear  the  respon- 
sibility of  upholding  the  nation’s  honor,  shall  not  by  insisting  upon 
the  impossible,  put  off  the  day  when  the  possible  can  be  accom- 
plished. The  peoples  of  the  world  have  advanced  unequally  along 
the  road  that  leads  to  justice  and  fair-dealing,  one  with  another 
(exactly  as  there  has  been  unequal  progress  in  securing  such 
justice  by  each  within  its  own  borders)  ; and  the  road  stretches 
far  ahead  even  of  the  most  advanced.  Harm  and  not  good  would 
result  if  the  most  advanced  nations,  those  in  which  most  freedom 
for  the  individual  is  combined  with  most  efficiency  in  securing 
orderly  justice  as  between  individuals,  should  by  agreement 
disarm  and  place  themselves  at  the  mercy  of  other  peoples  less 
advanced,  of  other  peoples  still  in  the  stage  of  military  barbarism 
or  military  despotism.  Anything  in  the  nature  of  general  disarma- 
ment would  do  harm  and  not  good  if  it  left  the  civilized  and 
peace-loving  peoples,  those  with  the  highest  standards  of  muni- 


31 

cipal  and  international  obligation  and  duty,  unable  to  check  the 
other  peoples  who  have  no  such  standards,  who  acknowledge  no 
such  obligations. 

Finally,  it  behooves  all  of  us  to  remember,  and  especially 
those  of  us  who  either  make  or  listen  to  speeches,  that  there  are 
few  more  mischievous  things  than  the  custom  of  uttering  or 
applauding  sentiments  which  represent  mere  oratory,  and  which 
are  not,  and  cannot  be,  and  have  not  been,  translated  from  words 
into  deeds.  An  impassioned  oration  about  peace  which  includes 
an  impassioned  demand  for  something  which  the  man  who  makes 
the  demand  either  knows  or  ought  to  know,  cannot,  as  a matter 
of  fact,  be  done,  represents  not  gain,  but  loss,  for  the  cause  of 
peace ; for  even  the  noblest  cause  is  marred  by  advocacy  which  is 
either  insincere  or  foolish. 

These  warnings  that  I have  uttered  do  not  mean  that  I 
believe  we  can  do  nothing  to  advance  the  cause  of  international 
peace.  On  the  contrary,  I believe  that  we  can  do  much  to  advance 
it,  provided  only  we  act  with  sanity,  with  self-restraint,  with 
power;  which  must  be  the  prime  qualities  in  the  achievement 
of  any  reform.  The  nineteenth  century  saw,  on  the  whole,  a real 
and  great  advance  in  the  standard  of  international  conduct,  but 
as  among  civilized  nations  and  by  strong  nations  toward  weaker 
and  more  backward  peoples,  the  twentieth  century  will,  I believe, 
witness  a much  greater  advance  in  the  same  direction.  The  United 
States  has  a right  to  speak  on  behalf  of  such  a cause,  and  to  ask 
that  its  course  during  the  half  dozen  opening  years  of  the  century 
be  accepted  as  a guaranty  of  the  truth  of  its  professions. 

During  these  six  years  we  can  conscientiously  say  that 
without  sacrificing  our  own  rights,  we  have  yet  scrupulously 
respected  the  rights  of  all  other  peoples.  With  the  great  military 
nations  of  the  world,  alike  in  Europe  and  in  that  newest  Asia, 
which  is  also  the  oldest,  we  have  preserved  a mutually  self- 
respecting  and  kindly  friendship.  In  the  Philippine  Islands  we 
are  training  a people  in  the  difficult  art  of  self-government,  with 
more  success  than  those  best  acquainted  with  the  facts  had  dared 
to  hope.  We  are  doing  this  because  we  have  acted  in  a spirit 
of  genuine  disinterestedness — of  genuine  and  single-minded 
purpose  to  benefit  the  islanders — and,  I may  add,  in  a spirit 


32 

wholly  untainted  by  that  silly  sentimentality  which  is  often  more 
dangerous  to  both  the  subject  and  the  object  than  downright 
iniquity. 

In  Panama  we  are  successfully  performing  what  is  to  be 
the  greatest  engineering  feat  of  the  ages,  and  while  we  are 
assuming  the  whole  burden  of  the  work,  we  have  explicitly 
pledged  ourselves  that  the  use  is  to  be  free  for  all  mankind.  In 
the  islands  of  the  Caribbean  we  have  interfered  not  as  conquerors, 
but  solely  to  avert  the  need  of  conquest.  The  United  States  Army 
is  at  this  moment  in  Cuba,  not  as  an  act  of  war,  but  to  restore 
Cuba  to  the  position  of  a self-governing  republic.  With  Santo 
Domingo,  we  have  just  negotiated  a treaty  especially  designed 
to  prevent  the  need  of  any  interference  either  by  us  or  by  any 
foreign  nation  with  the  internal  affairs  of  the  island,  while  at  the 
same  time  securing  to  honest  creditors  their  debts  and  to  the 
government  of  the  islands  an  assured  income,  and  giving  to  the 
islanders  themselves  the  chance,  if  only  they  will  take  advantage 
of  it,  to  achieve  the  internal  peace  they  so  sorely  need. 

Mr.  Root’s  trip  thru  South  America  marked  the  knitting 
together  in  the  bonds  of  self-respecting  friendship  of  all  the 
republics  of  this  continent;  it  marked  a step  toward  the  creation 
among  them  of  a community  of  public  feeling  which  will  tell  for 
justice  and  peace  thruout  the  western  hemisphere.  By  the  joint 
good  offices  of  Mexico  and  ourselves,  we  averted  one  war  in 
Central  America,  and  did  what  we  could  to  avert  another,  altho 
we  failed.  We  have  more  than  once,  while  avoiding  officious 
international  meddling,  shown  our  readiness  to  help  other  nations 
secure  peace  among  themselves.  A difficulty  which  we  had  with 
our  friendly  neighbor  to  the  south  of  us,  we  solved  by  referring 
it  to  arbitration  at  The  Hague.  A difficulty  which  we  had  with 
our  friendly  neighbor  to  the  north  of  us,  we  solved  by  the  agree- 
ment of  a joint  commission  composed  of  representatives  of  the 
two  peoples  in  interest.  We  try  to  avoid  meddling  in  affairs  that 
are  not  our  concern,  and  yet  to  have  our  views  heard  where  they 
will  avail  on  behalf  of  fair-dealing  and  against  cruelty  and 
oppression.  We  have  concluded  certain  arbitration  treaties.  I 
only  regret  that  we  have  not  concluded  a larger  number. 

Our  representatives  will  go  to  the  Second  Peace  Conference 
at  The  Hague  instructed  to  help  in  every  practicable  way  to  bring 
some  steps  nearer  completion  the  great  work  which  the  First  Con- 


33 

ference  began.  It  is  idle  to  expect  that  a task  so  tremendous  can 
be  settled  by  one  or  two  conferences,  and  those  who  demand 
the  impossible  from  such  a Conference  not  only  prepare  acute 
disappointment  for  themselves,  but  by  arousing  exaggerated  and 
baseless  hopes  which  are  certain  to  be  disappointed,  play  the 
game  of  the  very  men  who  wish  the  Conference  to  accomplish 
nothing.  It  is  not  possible  that  the  Conference  should  go  more 
than  a certain  distance  further  in  the  right  direction.  Yet  I 
believe  that  it  can  make  real  progress  on  the  road  toward  inter- 
national justice,  peace  and  fair-dealing.  One  of  the  questions, 
although  not  to  my  mind  one  of  the  most  important,  which  will 
be  brought  before  the  conference,  will  be  that  of  the  limitation 
of  armaments.  The  United  States,  owing  to  its  peculiar  position, 
has  a regular  army  so  small  as  to  be  infinitesimal  when  compared 
to  that  of  any  other  first-class  power.  But  the  circumstances 
which  enable  this  to  be  so  are  peculiar  to  our  case,  and  do  not 
warrant  us  in  assuming  the  offensive  attitude  of  schoolmaster 
toward  other  nations.  We  are  no  longer  enlarging  our  navy. 
We  are  simply  keeping  up  its  strength,  very  moderate  indeed 
when  compared  with  our  wealth,  population  and  coast-line;  for 
the  addition  of  one  battleship  a year  barely  enables  us  to  make 
good  the  units  which  become  obsolete.  The  most  practical 
step  in  diminishing  the  burden  of  expense  caused  by  the  increasing 
size  of  naval  armament  would,  I believe,  be  an  agreement  limiting 
the  size  of  all  ships  hereafter  to  be  built;  but  hitherto  it  has  not 
proved  possible  to  get  other  nations  to  agree  with  us  on  this 
point. 

More  important  than  reducing  the  expense  of  the  implements 
of  war  is  the  question  of  reducing  the  possible  causes  of  war, 
which  can  most  effectually  be  done  by  substituting  other  methods 
than  war  for  the  settlement  of  disputes.  Of  those  other  methods, 
the  most  important  which  is  now  attainable  is  arbitration.  I do 
not  believe  that  in  the  world  as  it  actually  is,  it  is  possible  for 
any  nation  to  agree  to  arbitrate  all  difficulties  which  may  arise 
between  itself  and  other  nations ; but  I do  believe  that  there  can 
be  at  this  time  a very  large  increase  in  the  classes  of  cases  which 
it  is  agreed  shall  be  arbitrated,  and  that  provision  can  be  made 
for  greater  facility  and  certainty  of  arbitration.  I hope  to  see 
adopted  a general  arbitration  treaty  among  the  nations;  and  I 
hope  to  see  the  Hague  Court  greatly  increased  in  power  and 


34 

permanency,  and  the  judges  in  particular  made  permanent  and 
given  adequate  salaries,  so  as  to  make  it  increasingly  probable 
that  in  each  case  that  may  come  before  them,  they  will  decide 
between  the  nations,  great  or  small,  exactly  as  a judge  within 
our  own  limits  decides  between  the  individuals,  great  or  small, 
who  come  before  him.  Doubtless  many  other  matters  will  be 
taken  up  at  The  Hague ; but  it  seems  to  me  that  this  of  a general 
arbitration  treaty  is  perhaps  the  most  important. 

Again  wishing  you  all  good  fortune  in  your  work, 

Sincerely  yours, 


Mr.  Carnegie: 

You  all  know  every  President  must  have  some  man  who  is 
his  right  hand.  Sometimes  they  get  a man  who  is  more  than 
a right  hand,  and  does  for  him  some  of  the  head  work  as  well. 
We  are  now  to  hear  from  a gentleman  who  has  traveled  further 
North  and  further  South  than  any  other  Secretary  of  State  we 
were  ever  blessed  with,  carrying  the  olive  branch  of  Peace  and 
Brotherhood  to  the  furthest  Republic  in  the  South,  and  up  to 
Canada  in  the  North.  He  has  made,  he  is  going  to  make,  a 
great,  great  record.  (Applause.) 

Among  many  other  good  qualities  he  has,  he  is  a New 
Yorker.  I beg  leave  to  present  to  you  Honorable  Elihu  Root, 
Secretary  of  State. 

The  American  Sentiment  of  Humanity 

Hon.  Elihu  Root 

In  every  country  which  has  reached  a high  stage  of  civili- 
zation may  be  seen  the  working  of  two  distinct  and  apparently 
inconsistent  motives  or  principles  in  national  conduct.  On  the 
one  hand,  there  is  the  narrowly  and  immediately  utilitarian  motive, 
and  there  is  the  competitive  attitude  fashioned  upon  the  habits  of 
self-preservation  and  self-assertion  enjoined  by  the  necessities 
of  the  struggle  for  existence.  With  this  motive  each  country 
pursues  specific  national  advantages,  meeting  in  a hard,  dry, 
business-like  way,  without  sympathy  or  sentiment,  the  facts  of  a 


35 

world  in  which  there  is  much  selfishness  and  greed,  in  which  every 
nation  is  primarily  looking  out  for  itself,  and  in  which  there  is 
ordinarily  some  aggressor  ready  to  take  advantage  of  the  over- 
trusting and  defenceless. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  is  the  ethical,  altruistic,  human 
impulse  that  presses  forward  constantly  toward  ideals.  Its 
possessors,  loving  liberty  and  justice  and  peace,  long  to  make  all 
men  free  and  safe  and  secure  in  their  rights ; their  eyes  are  fixed 
upon  the  ultimate  good  toward  which  civilization  tends ; they  are 
striving  that  better  things  shall  replace  the  cynicism  and  selfishness 
and  cruelty  which  have  always  so  widely  characterized  mankind; 
they  assert  principles  and  set  up  standards  of  action,  which  they 
call  upon  mankind  to  adopt;  and  mankind  too  often  gives  theo- 
retical assent  but  denies  practical  conformity.  In  every  man’s 
nature  there  are  manifestations  or  traces  of  each  of  these  impulses ; 
in  every  nation  there  are  many  citizens  in  whom  one,  and  many 
in  whom  the  other  impulse  strongly  predominates.  As  circum- 
stances bring  one  class  of  motives  or  another  into  control  of 
national  conduct  in  different  fields  of  national  action,  strangely 
variant  and  inconsistent  national  action  results.  The  same  nation 
may  be  seen  at  one  time  hard  and  practical,  at  another  or  perhaps 
in  another  field  at  the  same  time,  exhibiting  the  highest  degree  of 
unselfishness  and  humanity.  Under  the  predominance  of  one 
motive  national  power  has  been  built  up ; administration  has  been 
made  effective;  commerce  has  been  extended;  material  wealth, 
the  matrix  of  civilization,  has  been  created  and  protected;  the 
citizens  of  each  country  have  been  secured  against  aggression 
from  without;  and,  in  the  slow  process  of  centuries,  the  code  of 
practical  rules  convenient  and  necessary  to  the  peaceable  inter- 
course of  nations  has  been  elaborated.  Under  the  predominance 
of  the  other  motive,  the  conception  of  individual  charity  and 
humanity,  which  found  its  highest  expression  in  the  Christian 
Revelation,  has  slowly  impressed  itself  upon  the  conception  of 
national  duty  and  responsibility.  In  its  development  the  idea  of 
national  conscience  and  national  ethics  has  been  forced  into  the 
international  system  which  formerly  acknowledged  the  undisputed 
sway  of  selfishness  and  cruelty,  long  condemned  as  immoral  in  the 
relations  between  individuals. 

It  is  natural  that  the  hard  and  practical  motive  shall  be  upper- 
most in  the  men  engaged  in  the  conduct  of  government ; they  are 


36 

endowed  with  limited  and  definite  powers  and  charged  with 
specific  trusts  for  the  benefit  of  their  own  people;  their  duties 
are  to  protect  and  advance  the  interests  of  their  own  country, 
and  those  duties  relate,  in  the  main,  to  the  material  interests  of 
their  countrymen ; their  specific  powers  are  given  to  them  for  that 
specific  purpose;  they  have  no  warrant  of  attorney  to  express 
or  give  effect  to  the  benevolent  or  humanitarian  impulses  of  their 
constituents;  under  constitutional  government,  as  a rule,  such 
expression  is  not  conferred  by  law  upon  public  officers,  but  is 
reserved  to  the  people.  In  the  discharge  of  their  international 
duties  governmental  officers  have  to  deal  with  a world  of  selfish 
competition  and  ever-present  possibility  of  aggression  and  inquiry, 
which  compel  them  to  think  first  and  chiefly  of  the  interest  of  their 
own  country  as  a lawyer  argues  the  case  of  his  client.  They  are 
constrained  by  the  rules  of  conduct  between  nations  which  the 
experience  of  centuries  has  shown  to  be  necessary  to  the  peace  of 
the  world.  Among  the  first  of  these  is,  that  the  government  of 
each  nation  shall  attend  to  its  own  business,  and  respect  the 
sovereignty  and  refrain  from  interfering  with  the  internal  affairs 
of  every  other  nation.  This  rule  is  the  chief  protection  of 
the  liberty  of  small  and  weak  nations  against  the  aggression  of 
the  strong.  To  break  it  down  whenever  the  officers  of  one  govern- 
ment disapprove  the  conduct  of  another  government  within  its 
own  jurisdiction,  would  be  to  break  down  the  barriers  which 
civilization  has  erected  for  the  protection  of  the  weak,  with  results 
as  fatal  as  if  the  executive  were  allowed  to  make  orders  and  the 
judge  to  issue  decrees  according  to  their  own  kindly  impulses 
without  regard  to  the  limitations  of  law. 

It  is  natural  that  the  altruistic  and  humanitarian  view, 
broader  and  less  immediately  practical,  shall  be  taken  by  students 
and  thinkers,  by  teachers  and  philosophers,  by  men  who,  not 
burdened  by  the  necessity  of  putting  theories  into  practice,  are  at 
liberty  to  look  upon  the  world  as  it  ought  to  be  and  to  urge 
mankind  on  toward  acceptance  of  their  ideals.  These  men  are 
masters  of  their  own  power ; they  have  a warrant  from  all 
whom  their  eloquence,  their  persuasion,  their  reasoning,  or  the 
inherent  soundness  of  their  ideas  bring  into  agreement  with 
them,  to  press  their  views  upon  the  world  and  insist  upon 
conformity.  In  every  civilized  land  their  numbers,  their  power 
and  their  following  have  increased,  most  of  all  in  lands  where 


37 

freedom  is  most  perfect  and  justice  most  pure,  until  the  voices  of 
the  few  visionaries,  long  ago  crying  in  the  wilderness,  have 
become  the  sound  of  a multitude ; and  a public  opinion  of  the 
world,  insisting  upon  righteousness  and  peace  among  nations  as 
among  individuals,  is  beginning  to  be  perceived  and  to  effect  the 
national  purpose  which  governments  represent. 

It  is  inevitable  that  the  men  who  are  directed  by  these  two 
widely  differing  impulses  should  sometimes  be  impatient  of  each 
other.  The  humanitarian  is  repelled  by  the  hardness  of  the 
practical  man,  who  seems  unsympathetic  in  his  failure  to  act 
upon  views  that  are  certainly  sound  in  the  abstract  and  which 
ought  to  be  accepted  by  all  the  world.  The  practical  adminis- 
trator is  distressed  by  the  urgency  of  the  theorist,  who,  ignorant 
of  real  conditions,  urges  him  to  a course  of  action  which  he 
knows  cannot  possibly  be  taken,  or,  if  it  were  taken  under 
existing  conditions,  would  result  only  in  evil.  One  tends  to 
think  lightly  of  the  other  as  an  impracticable  theorist,  and  in 
return  is  condemned  by  the  other  as  unfeeling  and  cynical.  Both 
judgments  are  probably  often,  to  some  extent,  true,  but  both  are 
generally,  and  to  a much  greater  extent,  wrong.  Each  class 
plays  its  necessary  part  in  the  great  work  of  advancing  civiliza- 
tion. It  cannot  be  doubted  that  the  supreme  results  for  humanity 
are  secured  by  the  combination,  the  union,  the  blending  of  the 
two  impulses,  to  the  end  that  national  selfishness  may  be  the 
most  broadly  intelligent,  and  humanitarian  idealism  the  most 
effectively  practical. 

Your  invitation  to  take  part  in  the  opening  of  this  Peace 
Congress  has  come  to  me  as  an  occasion  to  declare  the  alliance 
and  sympathy  of  the  American  Government  with  that  other 
power — the  sentiment  of  humanity — which  in  all  lands,  and  most 
strongly  in  our  generation,  without  fleets,  or  armies,  or  titles, 
or  dignities,  or  compulsion  of  force,  is  leading  mankind  continu- 
ally to  a nobler  life.  The  American  people  are  practical, 
material,  strenuous  in  business,  eager  for  wealth ; energetic  in 
production,  and  venturous  in  commerce ; insistent  upon  their 
rights,  proud  of  their  country,  jealous  of  its  power  and  its 
prestige;  but  there  is  a stream  of  idealism  in  the  American 
nature  which  saves  our  nation  from  the  grossness  of  sordid 
materialism  and  makes  it  responsive  to  every  appeal  in  behalf  of 
liberty  and  righteousness,  of  peace  with  justice  and  of  human 


38 

brotherhood  the  world  over.  No  American  Government  could 
truly  represent  its  people  if  it  did  not  sympathize  heartily  with 
the  purposes  which  this  Congress  meets  to  promote;  and  the 
American  Government  of  to-day  does  sympathize  heartily  with 
those  purposes.  In  behalf  of  the  Government  I give  you  the 
kindly  and  appreciative  greeting  of  the  people  of  the  United 
States  and  welcome  you  as  spiritual  kindred  of  those  Americans 
of  great  heart  and  clear  intelligence  who  in  times  past,  striving 
for  ordered  liberty  and  the  peace  of  justice  in  this  land,  have 
conferred  inestimable  benefits  upon  all  mankind,  and  whose 
memory  and  example  are  our  most  precious  possessions. 

He  is  mistaken  who  depreciates  the  value  of  such  a meeting 
as  this,  or  iegards  its  discussions  as  merely  academic,  because 
its  members  have  not  the  power  themselves  to  give  effect  to  their 
resolutions.  The  open,  public  declaration  of  a principle  in  such 
a way  as  to  carry  evidence  that  it  has  the  support  of  a great 
body  of  men  entitled  to  respect,  has  a wonderfully  compelling 
effect  upon  mankind.  The  adoption  of  a new  standard  of  human 
action  is  never  the  result  of  force  or  the  threat  of  force;  it  is 
always  the  result  of  a moral  process,  and  to  the  initiation  and 
continuance  of  that  process  public  assertion  and  advocacy  of  the 
principle  are  essential.  When  that  process  has  been  worked  out 
and  the  multitude  of  men  whom  governments  represent  have 
reached  the  point  of  genuine  and  not  perfunctory  acceptance  of 
the  new  standard,  governments  conform  themselves  to  it. 

It  is  a common  saying  that  the  world  is  ruled  by  force,  that 
the  ultimate  sanction  for  the  rules  of  right  conduct  between 
nations  is  the  possibility  of  war.  That  is  less  than  a half-truth. 
There  was  a time  when  the  official  intercourse  between  nations 
which  we  call  diplomacy  consisted  chiefly  of  bargaining  and 
largely  of  cheating  in  the  bargain.  Diplomacy  now  consists 
chiefly  in  making  national  conduct  conform  or  appear  to  conform 
to  the  rules,  which  codify,  embody  and  apply  certain  moral 
standards  evolved  and  accepted  in  the  slow  development  of 
civilization.  The  continual  unceasing  process  of  diplomatic  inter- 
course by  which  these  standards  are  pressed  upon  the  government 
of  every  nation,  backed  by  the  tremendous  power  of  the  opinions 
of  the  civilized  world,  enforced  by  the  desire  for  the  good  opinion 
and  apprehension  of  the  disfavor  of  mankind,  form  a strong 


39 

external  restraint  upon  national  conduct;  and  these  standards 
have  been  created  by  the  evolution  of  moral  as  opposed  to  physical 
forces. 

The  value  of  declaring  a principle  may  be  illustrated  by  the 
effect  of  the  arbitration  convention  agreed  upon  in  the  Inter- 
national Peace  Conference  at  The  Hague  in  1899.  That 
Convention  did  a little  more  than  to  declare  principles ; it 
provided  machinery  by  which  there  might  be  arbitration,  but  it 
bound  nobody  to  arbitrate,  or  to  mediate,  or  to  accept  mediation. 
The  machinery  provided  has  been  but  little  used ; the  arbitrations 
at  The  Hague  have  been  few  and  not  of  the  first  order  of 
importance ; yet  no  one  can  for  a moment  question  the  enormous 
impetus  given  to  the  principles  of  arbitration  of  international 
controversies  in  lieu  of  war  by  the  open  and  public  declaration 
that  such  controversies  ought  to  be  arbitrated. 

The  thoughts  of  all  men  who  hope  for  the  peace  of  the  world 
are  now  turned  toward  the  Second  Peace  Conference  so  soon  to 
meet  at  The  Hague.  It  is  cheering  to  note  the  difference  between 
the  attitude  of  the  world  toward  this  conference  about  to  meet 
and  the  way  in  which  the  world  looked  upon  the  First  Conference 
at  The  Hague  eight  years  ago.  The  generous  impulse  and  noble 
sentiment  of  the  Emperor  of  Russia  which  dictated  the  call  for 
that  Conference,  supported  by  his  great  power  and  commanding 
position,  compelled  the  respect  or  the  appearance  of  respect  from 
all  the  great  powers;  yet  it  is  safe  to  say  that  the  prevailing 
sentiment  among  the  powers  as  to  the  practical  value  of  the 
Conference  was  one  of  polite  incredulity,  and  that  the  delegates 
whom  he  had  called  together  met  amid  an  almost  universal  belief 
that  nothing  would  or  could  be  accomplished.  The  primary 
object  of  the  call  for  the  First  Conference — the  accomplishment 
of  the  great  design  which  Henry  IV  of  France  conceived  three 
centuries  ago  for  the  limitation  of  armaments  in  Europe — failed 
for  the  time;  yet  the  Conference  accomplished  other  things  of 
the  highest  value  to  humanity;  and  it  demonstrated  for  the  first 
time  in  the  world’s  history  the  potent  and  epoch-making  fact, 
that  a Congress  of  the  world’s  powers,  convened  not  to  deal  with 
some  concrete  question  demanding  immediate  solution,  but 
convened  to  consider  and  discuss  the  application  of  the  general 
and  fundamental  principles  of  justice  and  humanity  under  all 
circumstances  and  to  all  international  questions,  can  be  made  a 


40 

practical  and  effective  agency  in  the  government  of  the  world. 
It  developed  a new  method  and  a new  power  for  the  betterment 
of  international  conduct,  far  superior  to  the  ordinary  rules  of 
diplomatic  intercourse,  far  broader  in  its  scope,  far  nobler  in  its 
purpose. 

Upon  the  eve  of  the  Second  Conference,  whose  very  possi- 
bility demonstrates  the  success  and  approves  the  wisdom  of  the 
First,  it  seems  to  me  that  all  men  who  love  their  fellowmen  and 
who  hope  for  the  rule  of  righteousness  and  peace  on  earth, 
should  feel  a deep  sentiment  of  gratitude  toward  that  sovereign 
whose  noble  character  led  him  to  call  together  the  First  Confer- 
ence and  an  equally  deep  sympathy  with  him  in  the  hard  and 
difficult  task  in  which  he  is  now  engaged  of  establishing  consti- 
tutional government  in  his  own  dominions. 

The  Second  Conference  is  about  to  meet  amid  universal 
recognition  that  it  is  of  practical  significance ; it  commands 
respect;  its  possibilities  are  the  object  of  solicitude;  the  resolu- 
tions which  it  may  reach  are  anticipated  as  of  probable  potency 
in  the  affairs  of  nations;  it  is  not  regarded  as  an  occasion  for 
mere  academic  discussion,  but  finds  its  place  among  the  agencies 
by  which  the  world  is  governed.  I cannot  doubt  that  it  will 
accomplish  much  for  the  benefit  of  mankind ; that  in  many 
things  it  will  bring  the  practice  of  nations  into  closer  conformity 
with  these  great  principles  of  conduct  to  which  nations  have 
accorded  such  ready  assent  in  theory,  but  such  reluctant  compli- 
ance when  their  particular  interests  are  involved.  The  First 
Conference  relegated  to  a future  Conference  the  consideration  of 
three  broad  general  questions  affecting  the  conduct  of  nations 
toward  each  other : First,  the  rights  and  duties  of  neutrals ; 
second,  the  inviolability  of  private  property  in  naval  warfare; 
and  third,  the  bombardment  of  towns,  villages  and  ports  by  a 
naval  force.  It  is  understood  that  all  these  subjects  shall  be 
considered  at  the  Second  Conference.  The  First  Conference  also 
adopted  two  resolutions  relating  to  naval  and  military  armament. 

The  first  was : 

“The  Conference  is  of  opinion  that  the  restriction 
of  military  charges,  which  are  at  present  a heavy  burden 
on  the  world,  is  extremely  desirable  for  the  increase  of 
the  material  and  moral  welfare  of  mankind.” 


41 


The  second  was : 

“The  Conference  expresses  the  wish  that  the  gov- 
ernments, taking  into  consideration  the  proposals  made 
at  the  Conference,  may  examine  the  possibility  of  an 
agreement  as  to  the  limitation  of  armed  forces  by  land 
and  sea  and  of  war  budgets.” 

The  Government  of  the  United  States  has  been  of  the  opinion 
that  the  subject  matter  of  these  resolutions  ought  to  be  further 
considered  and  discussed  in  the  Second  Conference;  that  the 
subject  is  in  the  nature  of  unfinished  business  and  cannot  be 
ignored,  but  must  be  dealt  with;  that  there  ought  to  be  at  least 
an  earnest  effort  to  reach  or  to  make  progress,  toward  reaching 
some  agreement  under  which  the  enormous  expenditure  of  money 
and  the  enormous  withdrawal  of  men  from  productive  industry 
for  warlike  purposes  may  be  reduced  or  arrested  or  retarded. 
We  have  not  been  unmindful  of  the  fact  that  the  question  is  one 
which  primarily  and  in  its  present  stage  concerns  Europe  rather 
than  America;  that  the  conditions  which  have  led  to  the  great 
armaments  of  the  present  day  are  mainly  European  conditions, 
and  that  it  would  ill  become  us  to  be  forward  or  dogmatic  in  a 
matter  which  is  so  much  more  vital  to  the  nations  of  Europe  than 
to  ourselves.  It  sometimes  happens,  however,  that  a State 
having  little  or  no  special  material  interest  in  a proposal  can,  for 
that  very  reason,  advance  the  proposal  with  the  more  advantage 
and  the  less  prejudice.  The  American  Government  accordingly, 
at  an  early  stage  of  the  discussion  regarding  the  program, 
reserved  the  right  to  present  this  subject  for  the  consideration  of 
the  Conference;  several  European  powers  have  also  given  notice 
of  their  intention  to  present  the  subject.  It  may  be  that  the  dis- 
cussion will  not  bring  the  Second  Conference  to  any  definite  and 
practical  conclusion ; certainly  no  such  conclusion  can  be  effective 
unless  it  meet  with  practically  universal  assent,  for  there  can  be 
no  effective  agreement  which  binds  some  of  the  great  powers 
and  leaves  others  free.  There  are  serious  difficulties  in  formu- 
lating any  definite  proposal  which  would  not  be  objectionable  to 
some  of  the  powers,  and  upon  the  question  whether  any  specific 
proposal  is  unfair  and  injurious  to  its  interests  each  power  must 
be,  and  is  entitled  to  be,  its  own  judge. 

Nevertheless,  the  effort  can  be  made ; it  may  fail  in  this  Con- 
ference, as  it  failed  in  the  First ; but  if  it  fails,  one  more  step  will 


42 

have  been  taken  toward  ultimate  success.  Long-continued  and 
persistent  effort  is  always  necessary  to  bring  mankind  into  con- 
formity with  great  ideals ; every  great  advance  that  civilization 
has  made  on  its  road  from  savagery  has  been  upon  stepping-stones 
of  failure,  and  a good  fight  bravely  lost  for  a sound  principle  is 
always  a victory. 

The  Government  of  the  United  States  has  also  considered  that 
the  Second  Hague  Conference  might  well  agree  in  putting  some 
limitation  upon  the  use  of  force  for  the  collection  of  ordinary 
contract  debts  due  by  one  government  to  the  citizens  of  another. 

It  has  long  been  the  established  policy  of  the  United  States 
not  to  use  its  army  and  navy  for  the  collection  of  such  debts.  We 
have  not  considered  the  use  of  force  for  such  a purpose  consistent 
with  that  respect  for  the  independent  sovereignty  of  other  mem- 
bers of  the  family  of  nations  which  is  the  most  important  prin- 
ciple of  international  law  and  the  chief  protection  of  weak  nations 
against  oppression.  It  seems  to  us  that  the  practice  is  injurious 
in  its  general  effect  upon  the  relations  of  nations  and  upon  the 
welfare  of  weak  and  disordered  States,  whose  development  ought 
to  be  encouraged  in  the  interests  of  civilization,  and  that  it  offers 
frequent  temptation  to  bullying  and  oppression  and  to  unneces- 
sary and  unjustifiable  warfare.  It  is  possible  that  the  non-payment 
of  public  debts  may  be  accomplished  by  such  circumstances  of 
fraud  and  wrong-doing  or  violation  of  treaties  as  to  justify  the  use 
of  force  as  a last  resort ; but  we  hope  to  see  an  international  con- 
sideration of  the  subject  which  shall  discriminate  between  such 
causes  and  the  simple  non-performance  of  a contract  with  a pri- 
vate person,  and  to  see  a resolution  in  favor  of  reliance  exclusively 
upon  peaceful  means,  in  cases  of  the  latter  class.  It  may  well  be 
that  the  principle  of  arbitration  can  be  so  extended  in  its  appli- 
cation that  the  class  of  adventurers  who  have  long  been  in  the 
habit  of  trading  upon  the  necessities  of  weak  and  distressed 
governments  may  be  required  to  submit  their  often  exorbitant 
and  unconscionable  demands  to  an  impartial  tribunal  before 
which  both  parties  can  hear  both  as  to  the  validity  and  the  amount 
of  their  claims  and  the  time  and  manner  of  payment  to  which 
they  are  entitled.  The  record  of  the  cases  submitted  to  arbitra- 
tion during  recent  years  shows  that  the  total  awards  of  the  arbitral 
tribunals  have  amounted  to  a very  small  percentage  of  the 
demands  submitted.  It  is  difficult  to  resist  the  inference  that  the 


43 

claims  of  private  citizens  who  seek  the  good  offices  of  their  own 
government  to  obtain  payment  from  other  countries  generally 
need  investigation  by  fair  tribunals  rather  than  immediate  and 
peremptory  enforcement. 

In  the  general  field  of  arbitration  we  are  surely  justified  in 
hoping  for  a substantial  advance  both  as  to  scope  and  effec- 
tiveness. It  has  seemed  to  me  that  the  great  obstacles  to  the 
universal  adoption  of  arbitration  is  not  the  unwillingness  of  civi- 
lized nations  to  submit  their  demands  to  the  decision  of  an  impar- 
tial tribunal ; it  is  rather  an  apprehension  that  the  tribunal  selected 
will  not  be  impartial.  In  a despatch  to  Sir  Julian  Pauncefote 
dated  March  5,  1896,  Lord  Salisbury  stated  this  difficulty.  He 
said  that : 

“If  the  matter  in  controversy  is  important,  so  that 
defeat  is  a serious  blow  to  the  credit  or  the  power  of 
the  litigant  who  is  worsted,  that  interest  becomes  a more 
or  less  keen  partisanship.  According  to  their  sympa- 
thies, men  wish  for  the  victory  of  one  side  or  another. 
Such  conflicting  sympathies  interefere  most  formidably 
with  the  choice  of  an  impartial  arbitrator.  It  would  be 
too  invidious  to  specify  the  various  forms  of  bias  by 
which,  in  any  important  controversy  between  two  great 
powers,  the  other  members  of  the  commonwealth  of 
nations  are  visibly  affected.  In  the  existing  condition 
of  international  sentiment,  each  great  power  could  point 
to  nations  whose  admission  to  any  jury  by  whom  its 
interests  were  to  be  tried,  it  would  be  found  to  challenge ; 
and  in  a litigation  between  two  great  powers  the  rival 
challenges  would  pretty  well  exhaust  the  catalogue  of 
the  nations  from  which  competent  and  suitable  arbiters 
could  be  drawn.  It  would  be  easy,  but  scarcely  deco- 
rous, to  illustrate  this  statement  by  examples.  They  will 
occur  to  anyone’s  mind  who  attempts  to  construct  a 
panel  of  nations  capable  of  providing  competent  arbi- 
trators, and  will  consider  how  many  of  them  would  com- 
mand equal  confidence  from  any  two  litigating  powers. 

“This  is  the  difficulty  which  stands  in  the  way  of 
unrestricted  arbitration.  By  whatever  plan  the  tribunal 
is  selected,  the  end  of  it  must  be  that  issues  in  which  the 
litigant  States  are  most  deeply  interested  will  be  decid 


44 

by  the  vote  of  one  man,  and  that  man  a foreigner.  He 
has  no  jury  to  find  his  facts ; he  has  no  court  to  appeal  to 
to  correct  his  law;  and  he  is  sure  to  be  credited,  justly 
or  not,  with  a leaning  to  one  litigant  or  the  other.” 

The  feeling  which  Lord  Salisbury  so  well  expressed  is,  I 
think,  the  great  stumbling-block  in  the  way  of  arbitration.  The 
essential  fact  which  supports  that  feeling  is,  that  arbitrators  too 
often  act  diplomatically  rather  than  judicially;  they  consider 
themselves  as  belonging  to  diplomacy  rather  than  to  jurispru- 
dence; they  measure  their  responsibilty  and  their  duty  by  the 
traditions,  the  sentiments  and  the  sense  of  honorable  obligation 
which  have  grown  up  in  centuries  of  diplomatic  intercourse, 
rather  than  by  the  traditions,  the  sentiments  and  the  sense  of 
honorable  obligation  which  characterize  the  judicial  departments 
of  civilized  nations.  Instead  of  the  sense  of  responsibility  for 
impartial  judgment  which  weighs  upon  the  judicial  officers  of 
every  civilized  country,  and  which  is  enforced  by  the  honor  and 
self-respect  of  every  upright  judge,  an  international  arbitration 
is  often  regarded  as  an  occasion  for  diplomatic  adjustment. 
Granting  that  the  diplomats  who  are  engaged  in  an  arbitration 
have  the  purest  motives;  that  they  act  in  accordance  with  the 
policy  they  deem  to  be  best  for  the  nations  concerned  in  the  con- 
troversy; assuming  that  they  thrust  aside  entirely  in  their  consid- 
eration any  interests  which  their  own  countries  may  have  in  the 
controversy  or  in  securing  the  favor  or  averting  the  displeasure 
of  the  parties  before  them;  nevertheless  it  remains  that  in  such 
an  arbitration  the  litigant  nations  find  that  questions  of  policy 
and  not  simple  questions  of  fact  and  law  are  submitted  to  alien 
determination,  and  an  appreciable  part  of  that  sovereignty  which 
it  is  the  function  of  every  nation  to  exercise  for  itself  in  deter- 
mining its  own  policy,  is  transferred  to  the  arbitrators. 

An  illustration  of  this  view  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that 
one  of  the  features  of  the  extraordinary  advance  made  by  the 
nations  of  South  America  in  the  arts  of  peace  is  the  development 
of  arbitration  for  the  settlement  of  disputes,  and  especially  boun- 
dary disputes,  to  a greater  degree  than  in  any  other  part  of  the 
world.  This  has  been  facilitated  by  the  almost  complete  detach- 
ment of  South  American  politics  from  the  international  politics 
of  Europe ; so  that  it  has  been  easy  for  the  South  American  States 
to  find  arbitrators  who  neither  knew  nor  cared  for  any  political 


45 

question  in  South  America,  and  who,  therefore,  have  been  able  to 
determine  the  questions  before  them  with  sole  reference  to  the 
merits  of  the  question,  as  a trained  and  upright  judge  decides  a 
case  submitted  to  his  court. 

What  we  need  for  the  further  development  of  arbitration  is 
the  substitution  of  judicial  action  for  diplomatic  action,  the  sub- 
stitution of  judicial  sense  of  responsibility  for  diplomatic  sense 
of  responsibility.  We  need  for  arbitration,  not  distinguished 
public  men  concerned  in  all  the  international  questions  of  the  day, 
but  judges  who  will  be  interested  only  in  the  question  appearing 
upon  the  record  before  them.  Plainly  this  end  is  to  be  attained 
by  the  establishment  of  a court  of  permanent  judges  who  will 
have  no  other  occupation  and  no  other  interest  but  the  exercise 
of  the  judicial  faculty  under  the  sanction  of  that  high  sense  of 
responsibility  which  has  made  the  courts  of  justice  in  the  civilized 
nations  of  the  world  the  exponents  of  all  that  is  best  and  noblest 
in  modern  civilization. 

Let  me  add  a few  words  of  warning  concerning  your  antici- 
pations of  what  the  Second  Peace  Conference  is  to  do.  Do  not 
expect  too  much  of  it. 

It  is  an  essential  characteristic  of  such  a Conference  that  it 
shall  deal  not  with  matters  upon  which  the  nations  differ,  but 
with  matters  upon  which  the  nations  agree.  Immaterial  dif- 
ferences may  be  smoothed  away ; misunderstandings  may  be 
explained;  consideration  and  discussion  along  lines  that  do  not 
run  counter  to  any  immediate  and  specific  interest  may  work  out 
methods  of  applying  general  principles  in  such  a way  as  to  pre- 
vent future  differences ; progress  may  be  made  toward  agreement 
upon  matters  which  are  not  yet  ripe  for  complete  adjustment;  but 
the  moment  an  attempt  is  made  to  give  such  a Conference  any 
coercive  effect,  the  moment  any  number  of  nations  endeavor  to 
use  the  Conference  for  the  purpose  of  compelling  any  other 
nation  to  do  what  it  deems  inconsistent  with  its  interests,  that 
moment  the  Conference  fails. 

Such  a Conference  is  an  agency  of  peace;  not  the  peace  of 
conquest,  but  the  peace  of  agreement;  not  enforced  agreement, 
but  willing  and  cheerful  agreement.  So  far  as  the  nations  can  go 
together  in  such  an  agreement,  the  Conference  can  go,  and  no 
further. 

Many  lovers  of  their  kind,  certain  that  the  principles  which 


46 

they  see  so  clearly  ought  to  be  accepted  of  all  men,  are  unmindful 
of  the  many  differences  which  divide  the  nations  in  the  competi- 
tion of  trade  and  wealth,  for  honor  and  prestige;  unmindful  that 
the  selfishness  and  greed  and  willingness  to  do  injustice  which 
have  marked  all  human  history  still  exist  in  the  world ; unmindful 
that  because  of  these,  the  instinct  of  self-protection  engenders 
distrust  and  suspicion  among  the  nations ; and  they  will  be  sadly 
disappointed  because  the  Hague  Conference  of  1907  does  not 
realize  their  dreams  and  usher  in  “the  parliament  of  man  the 
federation  of  the  world.”  But  let  them  take  heart : a forward  step 
will  be  taken ; an  advance  will  be  made  toward  the  reign  of  peace 
and  justice  and  righteousness  among  men,  and  that  advance  will 
go  just  as  far  as  the  character  of  the  great  mass  of  civilized  men 
permits.  There  lies  the  true  measure  of  possibility  and  the  true 
origin  of  reforming  force.  Arbitration  and  mediation,  treaties 
and  conventions,  peace  resolutions,  declarations  of  principle, 
speeches  and  writings,  are  as  naught  unless  they  truly  represent 
and  find  a response  in  the  hearts  and  minds  of  the  multitude  of 
the  men  fwho  make  up  the  nations  of  the  earth,  whose  desires  and 
impulses  determine  the  issue  of  peace  and  war. 

The  end  toward  which  this  assemblage  strives — the  peace  of 
the  world — will  be  attained  just  as  rapidly  as  the  millions  of  the 
earth’s  peoples  learn  to  love  peace  and  abhor  war;  to  love  justice 
and  hate  wrong-doing;  to  be  considerate  in  their  judgment  and 
kindly  in  feeling  toward  aliens  as  toward  their  own  friends  and 
neighbors ; and  to  desire  that  their  own  countries  shall  regard  the 
rights  of  others  rather  than  be  grasping  and  overreaching.  The 
path  to  universal  peace  is  not  through  reason  or  intellectual 
appreciation,  but  through  the  development  of  peace-loving  and 
peace-keeping  character  among  men;  and  that  this  development, 
slow  though  it  be  as  measured  by  our  short  lives,  is  proceeding 
with  steady  and  unremitting  advance  from  generation  to  genera- 
tion no  student  of  history  can  question.  The  greatest  benefit  of 
the  Peace  Conference  of  1907  will  be,  as  was  that  of  the  Peace 
Conference  of  1899,  in  the  fact  of  the  Conference  itself;  in  its 
powerful  influence  molding  the  characters  of  men ; in  the  spec- 
tacle of  all  the  great  powers  of  the  earth  meeting  in  the  name 
of  peace,  and  exalting  as  worthy  of  honor  and  desire,  national 
self-control,  considerate  judgment  and  willingness  to  do  justice. 


From  Stereograph,  Copyright  1907.  by  Underwood  & Underwood,  New  York. 


Gov.  Charles  E.  Hughes 
Hon.  Seth  Low 


Hon.  Elihu  Root 


Hon.  Oscar  S.  Straus 
Hon.  Richard  Bartholdt 


47 


Mr.  Carnegie: 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : There  are  two  classes  of  poli- 
ticians, those  who  seek  the  office,  and  those  whom  the  office  seeks. 
(Applause.) 

There  are  at  least  two  instances  in  our  history  of  men  in 
private  life  who  pursued  the  path  of  duty — professional  duty — 
thinking  of  nothing  else  but  doing  their  duty.  The  beautiful 
lines  of  the  poet  are  applicable  to  them.  Tennyson  says  of  the 
Duke  of  Wellington,  following  the  path  of  duty : 

“The  path  of  duty  was  the  way  to  glory ; 

He  that  walks  it  only  thirsting 
For  the  right,  and  learns  to  deaden 
Love  of  self,  before  his  journey  closes 
He  shall  find  the  stubborn  thistle  bursting 
Into  glossy  purples,  which  out-redden 
All  voluptuous  garden  roses/’ 

So  it  is  with  the  gentleman  I am  about  to  present  to  you. 
He  has  begun  his  public  career.  Every  man  and  woman  in  the 
State  of  New  York,  and  in  the  United  States,  for  that  matter, 
knows  that  here  is  a man  whose  aims  end  not  with  self;  that  he 
embraces  the  office,  with  all  its  trials,  disappointments,  troubles, 
not  because  he  sought  it,  but  because  the  call  of  duty  came  to  him. 

I am  delighted  to  present  to  you  our  Governor  Hughes. 

(Mr.  Hughes  was  greeted  with  such  vociferous  applause  that 
Mr.  Carnegie  arose  and  cried  “Have  mercy  on  the  Governor!”) 

Welcome  from  New  York 

Governor  Charles  E.  Hughes 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : It  is  not  my  func- 
tion to  deliver  a formal  address  upon  any  of  the  topics  which  will 
engage  your  attention,  but  rather  in  the  name  of  the  State  of 
New  York  to  bid  you  a hearty  welcome.  It  is  my  pleasant  duty 
to  express  the  gratification  of  our  citizens  at  the  meeting  of  this 
Congress  and  their  appreciation  of  the  important  influences  which 
must  radiate  from  such  a representative  assemblage. 

It  is  fitting  that  this  meeting  should  be  held  in  a State  repre- 
senting in  so  conspicuous  a degree  the  varied  activities  of  peace, 
and  in  a metropolis  which  focuses  the  energies  of  a people  who, 


48 

in  beneficent  concord,  without  desire  of  conquest  or  lust  of  power, 
are  working  out  their  destiny  inspired  by  national  ideals  of 
equality  and  justice.  (Applause.) 

As  a New  Yorker,  and  as  one  representing  the  State  in  an 
official  capacity,  I find  it  agreeable  to  recall  the  names  of  its 
distinguished  sons  who  have  contributed  in  a marked  manner  to 
achievements  in  the  interest  of  the  peace  of  the  world.  You  will 
not  think  it  amiss  if  I claim  for  this  role  of  honor  the  foremost 
citizen  of  the  nation,  whose  federal  activities  have  not  obscured 
his  relationship  to  his  native  State  and  the  lustre  of  whose  fame 
as  President  of  the  Republic  has  been  heightened  by  his  service 
as  pacificator.  (Applause.) 

New  York  has  also  given  to  the  nation  the  eminent  public 
servant  who  has  addressed  you,  the  keeper  of  our  foreign  inter- 
ests in  whose  wise  diplomacy  every  citizen  is  assured  of  the  astute 
and  jealous  defense  of  our  peaceful  policies.  We  may  also  claim 
by  right  of  his  adoption  the  presiding  genius  of  this  Congress 
(applause),  whose  personal  interest  and  generous  benefactions 
have  contributed  so  notably  to  the  progress  of  this  world- 
movement. 

When  the  first  Peace  Conference  met  at  The  Hague  three  of 
the  six  representatives  of  the  United  States  were  New  Yorkers — 
Andrew  D.  White,  the  scholar  and  veteran  diplomatist ; that  emi- 
nent citizen  of  this  metropolis,  Seth  Low ; and  the  lamented  Fred- 
erick William  Holls,  the  versatile  secretary  of  the  American 
Commission  and  the  historian  of  the  work  of  the  Conference. 
(Applause.)  New  York  also  should  take  special  pride  in  the 
intelligent  service  in  the  cause  of  international  arbitration  which 
long  in  advance  of  the  meeting  of  that  Conference  was  rendered 
by  the  lawyers  of  this  State. 

In  January,  1896,  following  an  address  delivered  before  it  by 
the  Hon.  Chauncey  M.  Depew,  the  New  York  State  Bar  Associ- 
ation appointed  a committee  to  consider  the  subject  of  interna- 
tional arbitration,  and  to  devise  and  submit  to  it  a plan  for  the 
organization  of  a tribunal  to  which  international  questions  might 
be  submitted.  In  April  of  the  same  year,  after  careful  deliber- 
ation, the  committee  made  its  report,  recommending  the  establish- 
ment of  an  International  Court  of  Arbitration,  to  be  composed 
of  members  selected  by  the  agreeing  nations  and  to  be  open  at 
all  times  for  the  submission  of  controversies.  The  plan  was  laid 


49 

before  the  President  of  the  United  States,  and  later,  as  Secretary 
Foster  states  in  his  recent  work,  it  became  the  basis  of  the  instruc- 
tions of  the  American  delegates  to  the  Hague  Conference,  and 
in  accordance  with  this  plan  are  found  to  be  the  essential  fea- 
tures of  the  Permanent  Court  now  in  existence  at  The  Hague. 
(Applause.)  It  is  gratifying  to  trace  this  preliminary  and  influ- 
ential activity  of  our  public-spirited  fellow  citizens,  and  we  of 
the  State  of  New  York  welcome  the  members  of  this  Congress 
with  a cordiality  emphasized  by  our  long  and  sincere  interest  in 
the  questions  you  are  to  consider. 

There  are  few,  if  any,  to  plead  the  cause  of  war  in  general, 
however  it  may  be  defended  in  particular.  Statesmen  and  sol- 
diers alike  condemn  it,  and  against  its  monstrous  cruelties  and 
wastefulness,  commerce  and  sentiment  are  allied.  The  necessity 
of  war  as  a last  defence  of  liberty  and  honor  is  admitted  only  to 
be  deprecated,  and  in  the  desire  to  prevent  armed  strife,  there  is 
almost  complete  unanimity.  There  may  still  be  those  who  believe 
in  the  beneficent  effects  of  the  discipline  of  war,  and  who  shrink 
from  contemplating  a society  enervated  by  exclusive  devotion  to 
the  pursuits  of  peace.  Undoubtedly  benefits  have  been  con- 
ferred by  war.  Against  the  dark  background  of  ruin,  desolation 
and  death,  the  elemental  virtues  of  humanity  have  stood  out  in 
bold  relief.  And  aside  from  the  important  and  beneficial  results 
of  certain  wars,  the  world  has  largely  learned  its  lessons  of  cour- 
age and  fortitude,  of  the  supremacy  of  duty  and  the  sacred  obli- 
gations of  honor  from  those  who,  in  fierce  but  heroic  struggle, 
have  revealed  the  noblest  qualities  of  humanity.  “He  maketh  the 
wrath  of  man  to  praise  Him.” 

But  while  we  justly  appraise  these  consequences  of  past  con- 
flicts, we  also  know  well  their  cost,  and  we  keenly  appreciate  the 
frightful  evils  and  the  enormous  wastes  which  have  been  incident 
to  the  evolution  of  the  race  through  strife.  We  rejoice  that  the 
currents  of  progress  lead  to  peace  and  that  the  time  is  sure  to 
come  when  war  will  be  unthinkable. 

We  can  no  longer  look  to  war  for  the  development  of  either 
national  or  individual  character.  The  heroics  of  war  have  been 
replaced  by  mathematical  calculations.  (Applause.)  If  it  was 
ever  anything  else,  it  is  now  unmitigated  horror,  exhibiting  chiefly 
fiendish  aspects  of  ingenuity  and  scientific  skill  in  destruction. 
Under  our  modern  conditions  of  civilization  the  supposed  benefi- 


50 

cent  results  of  war  in  the  development  of  courage  and  stamina 
must  in  any  conceivable  event  be  shared  by  so  few  of  our  teeming 
populations  that  even  the  most  sanguinary  must  realize  that  the 
time  has  gone  by,  when,  by  any  stretch  of  imagination  it  can  be 
regarded  as  a general  disciplinary  agent.  (Applause.)  And  in 
the  controversies  of  peace  and  in  the  bloodless  struggles  for  the 
maintenance  of  truth  and  justice  in  our  personal  and  civic  rela- 
tions, must  be  found  the  arena  of  the  future  in  which  character 
may  find  severer  tests  than  ever  were  afforded  by  historic  battle- 
field. (Great  applause.) 

We  note  with  satisfaction  the  fact  that  war  can  now  be 
waged  only  under  onerous  conditions,  and  the  increasing  pressure 
of  economic  considerations  for  the  recognition  of  the  funda- 
mental doctrines  of  the  Christian  faith.  (Applause.)  The 
growth  of  representative  government,  with  its  restraints  upon  the 
ambitions  of  despotism  in  a just  appreciation  of  the  general 
welfare,  our  complex  commercial  relations  ignoring  national 
boundaries,  and  our  growing  intimacies  tending  to  make  the 
world  one  society  instead  of  a series  of  hostile  camps  (great 
applause)  are  reducing  the  possible  causes  of  armed  conflict  and 
powerfully  promoting  the  peaceful  settlement  of  controversies. 

Much  can  undoubtedly  be  accomplished  by  the  meeting  of 
the  representatives  of  the  nations  in  the  direction  of  perfecting 
international  law  and  in  providing  suitable  conventions  for  the 
regulation  of  war.  No  doubt  much  that  is  of  value  can  be 
secured  in  the  more  adequate  protection  of  commerce  and  of 
property  in  time  of  war. 

But  important  as  are  these  objects,  the  great  purpose  to  be 
achieved  is  the  prevention  of  war,  and  not  its  regulation.  (Great 
applause.) 

Among  nations  as  among  men,  the  requirements  of  the  senti- 
ment of  honor  are  subject  to  revision  as  conscience  becomes  more 
enlightened  and  truer  conceptions  of  personal  dignity  gain  place. 
And  it  may  be  reasonably  expected  that  public  opinion,  taken  in 
connection  with  the  serious  economic  aspects  of  war,  will  gradu- 
ally reduce  the  possible  area  of  strife  over  questions  thought  to 
involve  the  national  honor.  The  controversies  which  are  incident 
to  international  business  and  exchanges,  and  those  which  relate 
to  alleged  violations  of  international  agreements,  may  be  com- 
posed without  resort  to  arms.  And  without  minimizing  the  con- 


5i 

ditions  which  still  exist,  threatening  the  peace  of  the  world,  we 
have  reason  to  congratulate  ourselves  that  the  reign  of  war  is 
nearly  over. 

In  working  for  the  interests  of  peace,  regard  may  well  be 
had  to  the  influences  which  have  thus  far  proved  so  successful. 
The  end  is  not  to  be  sought  through  coercion,  or  by  the  vain 
attempt  to  compel  peace  by  force,  but  by  extending  to  the  utmost 
provisions  for  deliberation  and  for  conciliatory  measures. 

The  security  of  peace  lies  in  the  desire  of  the  people  for  peace. 
Protection  against  war  can  best  be  found  in  the  reiterated  expres- 
sion of  that  desire  throughout  the  nations  of  the  earth,  and  by 
convening  their  representatives  in  frequent  assemblies.  Provi- 
sion for  stated  meetings  of  the  Peace  Conference  with  their 
opportunities  for  interchanges  of  official  opinion,  the  perfecting 
of  plans  for  submissions  to  arbitration,  and  the  improvement  of 
the  machinery  of  the  International  Court  indicate  the  lines  along 
which  substantial  progress  may  be  made. 

The  people  of  the  State  of  New  York,  cordial  in  their 
welcome  to  the  delegates  to  this  Congress,  will  watch  its  delibera- 
tions with  sympathetic  interest,  earnestly  desirous  that  through 
these  meetings  the  united  sentiment  of  the  United  States  may 
find  effective  expression. 

Mr.  Carnegie  : 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  I would  just  like  to  say  ditto  to 
every  word  that  our  Governor  has  said.  (Applause.)  I will 
only  keep  you  a few  minutes  while  I state  that  we  are  met  to 
urge  the  speedy  removal  of  the  foulest  stain  that  remains  to 
disgrace  humanity,  since  slavery  was  abolished — the  killing  of 
man  by  man  in  battle  as  a mode  of  settling  international  disputes. 

This  Society  welcomes  to  membership  advocates  of  all  forms 
of  opposition  to  war,  from  the  non-resistant,  to  him  who  be- 
lieves, as  many  of  us  do,  that  it  would  be  our  duty  to  fight  when 
nk:essary  for  the  enforcement  of  Arbitration.  We  prescribe  no 
particular  means  of  accomplishing  our  aim. 

I belong  to  the  class  represented  by  the  little  boy  who  was 
taken  to  task  by  his  Sunday  School  teacher  for  having  struck 
Billy  Johnson.  “Oh,  ma’am,”  he  said,  “but  Billy  Johnson  struck 
me  first.” 


52 

“Oh,  my  dear,  dear  boy,  that  is  no  excuse  for  you. 
Remember  that  when  one  strikes  you  on  the  right  cheek,  you  are 
to  turn  the  other  also.” 

“Oh,  yes  ma’am,  that  may  be  so,  but  Billy  struck  me  on 
the  nose  and  I have  not  got  another  nose  to  turn  to  him.” 
(Laughter.) 

We  care  little  for  the  mode — everything  for  the  result.  We 
favor  the  program  of  the  Interparliamentary  Union  and  wish 
that  powerful  organization  Godspeed.  We  support  every  pro- 
posal that  makes  for  peace.  We  believe  with  the  Prime  Minister 
of  Great  Britain  that : 

“The  sentiment  in  favor  of  peace  has  become  incomparably 
stronger,  and  the  idea  of  the  arbitration  and  peaceful  adjustment 
of  international  disputes  has  attained  a practical  potency  and 
moral  authority  undreamed  of  in  1898.” 

We  believe  the  psychological  moment  approaches  when  a 
decided  step  forward  can  be  made.  Personally,  I am  a convert 
to  the  League  of  Peace  idea — the  formation  of  an  International 
Police,  never  for  aggression,  always  for  protection  to  the  peace 
of  the  civilized  world.  It  requires  only  the  agreement  of  a suffi- 
cient number  of  nations  to  establish  this.  Since  the  civilized 
world  is  now  united  by  electric  bonds  into  one  body  in  constant 
and  instant  communication,  it  is  largely  interdependent  and 
rapidly  becoming  more  so.  War  now  involves  the  interests  of 
all,  and  therefore  one  nation  has  no  longer  a right  to  break  the 
peace  without  reference  to  others.  Nations  hereafter  should  be 
asked  to  remember  this  and  not  to  resort  to  war,  but  to  settle 
their  disputes  peacefully. 

Leaving  out  of  sight  material  interests,  the  savagery  of  war, 
from  a moral  and  religious  point  of  view,  cries  aloud  to  civilized 
man  and  rouses  him  to  the  firm  resolve  that  it  shall  disgrace  our 
civilization  no  longer.  War  never  settles  who  is  right  but  who  is 
wrong.  Might,  not  right,  conquers. 

This  is  no  new  idea,  but  only  the  extension  of  what  has 
already  been  done.  Recently  six  nations — Germany,  Britain, 
France,  Russia,  Japan  and  our  own  country — combined  their 
forces  in  China  under  command  of  a German  General  for  a spe- 
cific purpose,  which  was  successfully  accomplished.  We  urge 
this  plan  as  the  easiest  and  speediest  means  of  attaining  Interna- 
tional Peace.  Suppose  these  nations,  or  others,  propose  at  the 


53 

Hague  Conference  that  they  and  such  other  nations  as  concur 
agree  to  say  to  the  world  that  no  nation  shall  be  permitted  to 
disturb  the  peace,  the  nations  thus  combined  would  constitute  an 
overwhelming  force;  peace  would  be  unbroken,  for  resistance 
would  be  folly.  Nevertheless,  the  overwhelming  force  must  be 
in  reserve,  each  nation  agreeing  when  necessary  to  exert  force  to 
keep  peace,  and  to  contribute  its  agreed-upon  quota,  just  as  the 
six  Powers  did  in  China. 

Before  resorting  to  force  it  would  be  well  to  begin  by  pro- 
claiming non-intercourse  with  the  offending  nation.  No  ex- 
change of  products,  no  loans,  no  military  or  naval  supplies,  no 
mails — these  restrictions  would  serve  as  a solemn  warning  and 
probably  prove  effective.  Force  should  always  be  the  last  resort. 

Such  nations  as  supply  funds  and  materials  of  war  to  others 
might  complain  that  their  interests  were  unduly  affected.  The 
maintenance  of  peace  is,  however,  always  the  greatest  interest  of 
industrial  nations,  because  for  the  thousands  gained  from  foreign 
wars,  millions  are  lost.  Peace  is  the  hand-maid  of  Prosperity. 

Let  us  hope  this  plan  will  be  submitted  to  the  Hague  Con- 
ference by  the  delegates  of  our  Republic.  Then  the  world  will 
know  that  America  stands  for  peace  through  a league  of  powers 
pledged  to  maintain  it. 

Let  us  determine  how  the  nations  stand  in  regard  to  this. 
Who  are  for  effective  peace  measures?  Who  are  opposed?  So 
holy  is  our  cause  that  no  avowed  opponent  of  Peace  can  be  found, 
but  who  will  fight  for  it  if  it  be  broken?  This  is  the  test. 

A dream,  a fond  dream ! exclaims  the  pessimist.  Not  so 
fast,  not  so  fast.  Consider  for  a moment  the  first  Hague  Confer- 
ence, which  was  called  for  the  specific  purpose  of  promoting 
disarmament.  This  proved  to  be  a dream,  but  what  was  it  that 
came  as  a reality  ? — the  appointment  of  a permanent  International 
Tribunal,  a High  Court  of  Humanity,  to  judge  between  nations 
and  to  settle  their  disputes  peacefully — the  most  unexpected  and 
the  most  notable  of  all  unlooked-for  advances  in  the  history  of 
man,  a creation  typified  by  Minerva  when  she  sprang  full-armed 
from  the  brow  of  Jupiter.  The  forming  of  a League  of  Peace 
at  the  next  meeting  of  that  body  of  men  which  produced  the 
seemingly  miraculous  birth  of  an  International  Court,  would  pass 
as  the  next  step  forward  in  a path  already  marked  out;  the 
legitimate  effect  of  the  first  astounding  miracle.  So  far  from  its 


54 

consummation  being  only  a dream,  it  is  so  near  to  reality  that  it 
lies  to-day  in  the  power  of  one  man  to  found  this  League  of 
Peace. 

Perhaps  our  President  may  yet  have  that  part  to  play.  He 
seems  born  for  great  roles  in  the  world  drama.  He  it  was  who 
breathed  the  breath  of  life  into  the  Hague  Conference  by  sending 
five  leading  powers  to  it  for  the  settlement  of  their  disputes ; 
who  closed  the  war  between  Russia  and  Japan;  who  recently 
induced  Mexico  and  several  of  our  neighboring  Southern  repub- 
lics to  join  in  remonstrance  against  war  between  two  of  the  smaller 
powers.  This  first  step  in  the  right  direction  heralds  the  day 
when  such  intervention  will  be  made  effective  by  agreement 
between  the  American  powers. 

I do  not  believe  that  the  first  step  that  the  President  has 
taken  through  the  Secretary  of  State  is  going  to  be  the  last;  I 
believe  that  instead  of  a dream,  we  shall  have  an  agreement 
which  shall  say  to  the  powers  of  this  continent,  “Our  interests 
are  interdependent  and  the  claims  of  humanity  prevail ; you  shall 
not  be  allowed  to  disturb  the  peace,  in  the  preservation  of  which 
we  are  all  concerned.” 

Would  that  the  great  peacemaker  of  the  future  might  be 
Theodore  Roosevelt!  Man  of  many  triumphs,  this  last  would 
lift  him  to  the  highest  place  in  history.  He  is  a bold  man  who 
ventures  to  forecast  or  limit  the  horoscope  of  Theodore  Roosevelt. 

At  this  moment,  however,  it  is  not  in  his  hands  but  in  those 
of  the  Emperor  of  Germany,  alone  of  all  men,  that  the  power  to 
abolish  war  seems  to  rest.  His  invitation  to  form  a union  of 
nations  for  this  specific  purpose  would  result  in  more  than  six 
nations  gladly  responding  to  his  call.  And,  as  in  the  temporary 
league  of  nations  in  China,  so  in  this  grander  League,  a German 
General  would  again  rightfully  command  the  allied  forces.  Much 
has  been  written  and  said  of  the  Emperor  as  a menace  to  the 
peace  of  Europe,  but  I think,  unjustly.  Let  me  remind  you,  he 
has  been  nearly  twenty  years  on  the  throne  and,  so  far,  is  guilt- 
less of  the  shedding  of  blood.  No  international  war  can  be 
charged  to  him.  His  sin  hereafter  may  be  one  of  omission,  since 
having  been  entrusted  with  power  to  abolish  war,  he  failed  to 
rise  to  this  transcendent  duty.  Let  us  watch  this  possible  man 
of  destiny,  however,  and  hope  that  a vision  of  his  true  mission 
may  be  revealed  to  him.  A higher  no  man  ever  had,  if  ever 


55 

one  even  approached  it  in  beneficence.  Were  that  destiny  revealed, 
I,  for  one,  believe  he  would  fulfill  it.  I cannot  see  how  a mortal 
man  could  resist  the  divine  call  to  perform  a service  so  glorious. 
There  are  no  victories  like  those  of  peace.  The  day  has  gone 
by  for  the  heroship  of  such  as  kill  and  destroy.  Millions  of 
Frenchmen  recently  voted  to  determine  their  greatest  man. 
Napoleon,  the  typical  hero  of  barbarism,  fell  to  seventh  on  the 
list;  Pasteur,  true  hero  of  civilization,  was  first,  and  scientists 
and  authors  followed.  The  world  advances  fast  toward  peace. 

Two  remarks  I wish  to  make.  We  hear  from  a high  source 
that  nations  cannot  submit  all  questions  to  arbitration.  My  reply 
to  that  is  what  the  thief  said  to  his  lawyer.  The  lawyer  asked, 
“What  did  you  do?”  The  thief  replied,  “I  just  took  a little  piece 
of  rope.”  “Why,”  said  the  lawyer,  “they  can’t  put  you  in  jail 
for  that.”  “Well,  they  have  done  it.” 

Now,  we  hear  that  nations  cannot  submit  all  questions  to 
arbitration.  Six  nations  in  the  world  have  already  done  that. 
(Applause.)  I think  that  is  a sufficient  answer. 

I have  a word  to  add  in  regard  to  the  sentiment  of  main- 
taining the  honor  of  the  country.  No  man  ever  touched  another 
man’s  honor ; no  nation  ever  dishonored  another  nation ; all 
honor’s  wounds  are  self-inflicted.  (Applause.) 

We  hear  a great  deal  about  justice.  Junius  says,  “The  first 
principle  of  natural  justice  forbids  men  to  be  judges  in  their 
own  cases.”  (Applause.)  There  is  no  justice  when  a man  says, 
“I  am  right.”  He  looks  only  upon  the  one  side  of  the  shield, 
self-interest.  Justice  is,  and  honor  is,  when  a gentleman  says, 
“You  may  be  right,  and  I may  be  wrong;  I will  refer  it  to  my 
friends  Root  and  Hughes,  both  honest  men,  and  what  they  say, 
Johnson,  you  and  I will  agree  to.”  That  is  justice  and  that  is 
honor.  We  don’t  allow  a man  to-day  to  avenge  his  injuries ; we 
compel  every  man  that  speaks  the  English  language  to  lay  his 
case  before  a disinterested  tribunal.  A man  who  attempts  to 
judge  in  his  own  case  is  radically  unjust. 

We  hear  another  thing  about  righteousness,  as  if  peace  and 
righteousness  could  be  ever  divorced.  (Applause.)  Can  you 
imagine  the  condition  of  a man’s  mind  when  he  says  that  peace 
and  good-will  on  earth  are  not  the  essence  of  the  righteousness 
that  exalts  a nation?  (Applause.) 

We  of  this  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress  sadly  acknowl- 


56 

edge  that  great  evils  exist  in  the  world,  but  so  far  as  this 
Congress  and  our  Society  are  concerned,  we  know  but  one,  and 
restrict  our  efforts  to  the  removal  of  that  alone.  All  speeches, 
all  work,  all  contributions,  are  devoted  to  the  abolition  of  war. 
We  invite  all  men  and  women  to  join  our  Society  and  to 
co-operate  with  us  in  the  great  work  before  us,  which  we  firmly 
believe  is  soon  to  receive  the  needed  impulse  which  will  bring 
victory.  If  we  dedicate  ourselves  to  the  abolition  of  war  as  the 
members  of  the  anti-slavery  societies  did  to  the  abolition  of 
slavery,  even  in  our  own  day  we  who  have  seen  the  owning  and 
selling  of  man  by  man  abolished,  may  yet  see  the  killing  of  man 
by  man  in  battle  no  longer  disgracing  our  common  humanity. 


57 


THIRD  SESSION 

INTERNATIONAL  VIEWS  OF  THE  PEACE 
MOVEMENT 

Carnegie  Hall 

Monday  Evening,  April  Fifteenth,  at  8.15 

ANDREW  CARNEGIE  Presiding 


Mr.  Carnegie: 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : I see  on  the  “Time  Table”  that 
Mr.  Carnegie  is  allowed  from  8:20  till  8:15.  (Applause  and 
laughter.)  Short  and  sweet;  Mr.  Carnegie  has  nothing  to  say 
except  to  inform  you  of  what  you  already  know,  that  we  are 
assembled  to-night  in  the  greatest  of  all  causes,  the  establishment 
on  earth  of  Peace  and  Good-will. 

Your  first  speaker  this  evening  is  Baron  d’Estournelles  de 
Constant,  who  is  known  to  all  those  who  have  the  peace  move- 
ment at  heart  in  Britain,  America  and  throughout  Europe.  He 
is  one  of  the  forthcoming  class  of  men  who  may  be  called  inter- 
national men.  Frenchmen  who  are  more  than  Frenchmen,  Ger- 
mans who  are  more  than  Germans,  Italians  who  are  more  than 
Italians,  and  Britons  who  are  more  than  Britons,  and  Americans 
who  are  even  more  than  Americans.  (Applause.)  And  even 
Scotchmen  (laughter)  will  open  their  hearts  and  try  to  take  in 
something  else  than  Scotchmen,  and  embrace  the  whole  world  as  a 
brotherhood.  That  is  our  ideal  and  that  is  the  ideal  that  brings  us 
together  to-night.  Long  and  weary  may  be  the  path,  but  there  is 
one  delight  however  long  and  however  weary;  we  will  live  and 
we  will  die,  strong  in  the  faith  that  the  day  is  coming  when  man 
will  no  longer  kill  man  like  wild  beasts  in  battle. 

I now  have  pleasure  in  presenting  to  you  Baron  d’Estour- 
nelles de  Constant. 


58 

Steps  Toward  Peace 

Baron  d’Estournelles  de  Constant 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  (First  addressing  the  audience  in 
French.) 

I call  this  a great  manifestation  of  the  good  will  of  man.  I 
wish  I could  express  to  you  in  the  strongest  way  what  I feel 
to-night.  I am  proud  of  the  good-will  manifested;  I am  proud 
because  I very  seldom  have  the  honor  of  addressing  such  a 
brilliant  assembly  on  the  subject  of  Peace.  In  fact  I am  afraid 
you  would  not  find  such  a fine  assembly  in  Europe  ready  to  listen 
to  a speech  on  Peace,  but  I hope  to  find  that  here  in  America  you 
can  have  many  such  audiences  for  such  a fine  question. 

I wish  to  offer  my  warm  congratulations  to  the  American 
citizens  who  have  organized  this  Congress,  and  especially  to  my 
eminent  friend,  Monsieur  Carnegie.  It  is  partly  to  accept  his 
invitation  I came  here,  although  I think  it  is  a necessary  thing 
that  a Frenchman,  or  a European,  should  see  what  can  be  done 
with  good  will  and  strong  hearts  devoted  to  the  cause  of  inter- 
national justice.  It  is  admirable  to  think  that  all  this  has  been 
started  by  men  who  could,  as  so  many  others  in  Europe,  and 
even  in  America,  I suppose,  do — enjoy  life  without  accomplishing 
anything.  Monsieur  Carnegie  himself  could  simply  enjoy  the 
good  rest  he  has  deserved  after  such  an  active  life;  instead  he 
thinks  the  time  of  rest  has  not  come  for  him  (applause),  nor 
would  he  find  it  rest  were  he  not  doing  good  to  others.  I came 
partly  to  express  my  gratitude  and  my  admiration  for  his  valuable 
activity,  and  to  say  that  I do  not  consider  he  is  resting,  I do  not 
consider  he  is  finishing  or  crowning  his  active  life,  but  that  he 
is  beginning  a new  one  for  the  benefit  of  others ; the  best  of  life, 
not  for  himself,  but  a life  of  more  happiness,  of  better  days  for 
the  people  who  will  follow  us.  (Applause.) 

I have  had  the  great  pleasure  this  afternoon  of  listening  to 
Mr.  Elihu  Root’s  speech.  (Applause.)  In  that  speech  Mr. 
Root  said  all  I would  have  liked  to  say  myself.  (Applause.)  Is 
it  not  very  striking,  that  coming  from  France,  having  prepared, 
without  saying  a word  about  it,  a very  long  and  special  speech 
on  organization  as  best  I could,  I should  find  what  I desired 
to  say  already  expressed  in  the  best  way  possible ! It  shows  that 
the  ocean  has  not  prevented  the  best  men,  the  men  of  different 


59 

nationalities  from  agreeing  about  the  truth  even  without  con- 
certed or  spoken  agreement.  (Applause.)  In  fact,  as  Mr.  Root 
said,  public  opinion  is  now  impressing  itself  even  upon  govern- 
ments that  are  not  willing  to  act  peacefully.  A meeting  like  this 
is  a most  significant  manifestation ; it  shows  that  you  are  expect- 
ing a great  deal,  not  of  a far  distant  future,  but,  as  Mr.  Root 
said,  from  the  coming  conference  at  The  Hague,  and  it  shows 
that  you  are  alive  to  its  importance.  That  is.  the  lesson,  that  is  the 
great  and  useful  lesson  I have  come  to  talk  about  here,  to  listen 
to  and  to  carry  back  home.  I shall  tell  them  what  I have  seen 
and  heard,  and  I shall  repeat  once  more  what  is  true,  that  the  New 
World  is  paying  its  debt  to  the  Old  World  by  regenerating 
Europe.  It  is  quite  natural — there  is  nothing  bitter  in  what  I say 
— it  is  simply  a fact  that  a son  or  a daughter  must  help  a parent 
when  he  feels  strong  enough  to  do  so. 

What  does  it  mean  that  we  are  expecting  a great  deal  from 
the  coming  Hague  Conference?  How  can  I,  who  have  been  a 
representative  of  France  and  a faithful  representative  of  France 
at  the  first  Hague  Conference,  say  this,  knowing  that  my  govern- 
ment and  my  people  would  not  be  displeased  at  what  I say?  I 
am  sure  no  one  will  contradict  me  when  I declare  that  we  expect 
a great  deal  from  the  Hague  Conference.  You  understand  that 
it  means  a great  deal.  It  means  reasonable  things ; it  does  not 
mean,  alas,  the  realization  of  universal  peace  or  of  disarmament. 
We  know  very  well  that  we  cannot  obtain  in  two  or  three  months 
results  so  far  distant.  We  know  very  well  that  progress  every- 
where, and  particularly  in  that  matter,  can  be  obtained  only  step 
by  step,  and  we  will  be  fortunate  and  satisfied  and  delighted  if  we 
are  only  sure  that  real  progress  may  be  obtained  in  the  coming 
Hague  Conference,  feeling  assured  that  after  that  Conference  and 
after  other  conferences,  and  ever  afterward,  future  generations 
will  progress  and  other  steps,  steps  we  cannot  even  foresee  now, 
will  be  taken.  I will  not  speak  of  the  questions  Mr.  Root  has  been 
speaking  about  this  morning,  especially  the  question  of  the  duties 
and  rights  of  neutrals  and  the  protection  of  private  property ; and 
if  you  will  allow  me,  I shall  not  speak  of  what  they  call  ameliora- 
tion of  war ; I do  not  believe  in  amelioration  of  war ; I believe  in 
the  establishment  of  peace.  (Applause.)  People  ought  not  to 
speak  of  humanizing  war.  It  cannot  be  done.  To  talk  of  human- 
izing war  is  to  dissimulate  the  real  character  of  war.  The  worse 


6o 


war  appears  to  be,  the  better.  We  can,  however,  do  something 
very  useful  in  the  way  of  arbitration.  In  arbitration  a great  deal 
has  been  done  already,  but  still  more  can  be  done  and  will  be 
done;  and  we  will  need  to  generalize  arbitration  so  that  it  may 
apply  to  as  many  nations  as  possible.  But  this  first  point  which 
was  called  new  five  or  six  years  ago  I do  not  need  to  discuss  now, 
it  is  so  well  understood  everywhere. 

The  second  point  is  more  complicated  and  not  so  well  known. 
It  is  the  question  of  the  limitation  of  armaments.  Of  course  this 
question  cannot  be  settled  by  the  Hague  Conference,  because  it 
will  only  come  about  as  the  natural  outgrowth  of  the  adoption 
of  arbitration.  Do  not  believe,  however,  that  it  is  useless  to 
discuss  that  question  at  the  Hague  Conference.  The  more  we 
discuss  the  question  of  these  heavy  burdens  of  military 
expenses  the  more  the  people  of  all  nations  will  understand  that  it 
is  to  their  interest  to  have  a better  organization  for  arbitration; 
so  it  is  necessary  that  we  speak  of  the  question  of  military 
expenses,  not  only  because  discussion  is  the  only  way  of  studying 
the  question  and  finding  some  solution  for  it,  but  because  it  is  in 
this  way  that  the  methods  of  arbitration  will  be  improved  day 
by  day.  Those  two  questions  of  arbitration  and  limitation  of 
armament  are  not  the  only  questions  that  the  Conference  at  The 
Hague  has  to  discuss.  There  will  be  another  question  which  is 
entirely  new.  I am  speaking  now  on  my  private  responsibility. 
It  is  very  well  to  settle  international  difficulties  by  arbitration,  but 
better  than  settling  difficulties  when  they  arise  is  to  settle  them 
before  they  arise.  (Applause.)  That  is  the  next  great  step  for- 
ward, and  it  can  be  attained,  because  everybody  understands  what 
great  progress  it  would  be.  Private  international  conciliation  is 
a new  institution  which  is  gaining  ground  in  all  countries.  Every- 
body is  intelligent  enough  to  understand  that  it  is  much  better  to 
try  to  settle  difficulties  in  the  beginning,  rather  than  when  they 
have  become  bitter  and  inextricable.  To  settle  international  diffi- 
culties we  require  very  careful  organization.  Many  things  have 
been  done  already;  the  Inter-Parliamentary  Union,  for  instance, 
is  a beginning  of  international  conciliation.  When  you  put  in 
touch  the  members  of  the  established  parliaments,  a German  with 
a Frenchman,  a Frenchman  with  an  Englishman  or  an  American, 
they  discover  at  once  that  they  can  agree  very  well  even  if  they 
cannot  speak  very  well.  That  means  that  there  are  human  weak- 


6i 

nesses  and  good  hearts  everywhere.  Such  little  facts  are  some- 
times sufficient  to  be  a kind  of  a revelation  to  men  who  have  not 
traveled,  who  know  foreigners  only  through  what  they  learned 
at  school.  When  they  come  home  and  say,  “I  have  been  received 
in  the  most  charming  way;  I met  an  American  mother,  or  an 
American  wife,  or  a little  girl,  or  one  or  two  nice  little  boys,”  they 
have  found  out  that  all  these  wives,  mothers,  daughters,  children, 
American,  French,  German,  English  are  good  human  beings  who 
love  their  parents  and  are  devoted  to  each  other.  They  remain,  as 
I remain,  a good  Frenchman,  but  they  understand  that  one  has 
to  be  a good  Frenchman  in  order  to  understand  what  constitutes 
a good  American,  a good  Englishman,  or  a good  German.  They 
must  understand  that,  and  that  is  what  they  do  understand  when 
they  come  into  these  various  parliaments  of  the  old  countries. 
It  must  come  about  in  that  way,  because  it  cannot  be  done  by  the 
government.  We  must  not  expect  everything  from  governments, 
things  are  to  be  done  by  ourselves,  and  we  have  to  work  them  out. 
All  the  best  people  of  one  country,  the  people  who  work  together 
for  the  best  things,  must  learn  to  know  each  other,  then  they  will 
get  into  good  relations  with  people  of  foreign  countries,  and 
then  when  the  good  people  of  these  foreign  countries  come  into 
good  relations,  they  will  correspond,  exchange  visits,  become 
acquainted,  discover,  as  I remarked  just  now,  that  there  are  good 
people  everywhere.  Then  there  will  be  immense  progress,  and 
the  bad  people,  these  people  who  want  war,  will  find  it  is  not  so 
easy  to  deceive  those  who  are  united  in  this  international  con- 
ciliation. They  are  already  instructed,  they  know  the  truth.  If 
they  read  in  newspapers  things  that  are  not  true,  they  say  to  one 
another,  “That  is  a lie,  you  must  not  follow  that  paper,”  and 
such  discrimination  is  enough  to  prevent  difficulties  which,  not 
long  ago,  were  sufficient  to  make  two  good  nations  go  to  war. 

Now,  I say  that  if  the  Hague  Conference  can  do  only  these 
things — generalize  arbitration,  affirm  the  necessity  of  discussing 
and  of  settling  the  question  of  the  limitation  of  armament,  and 
give  its  official  sympathy  to  the  organization  of  international 
conciliation,  the  rest  will  work  out. 

We  see  what  has  been  done  in  the  last  six  years  through 
the  American  initiative  alone — the  Hague  Conference,  the  Hague 
Court,  and  the  beautiful  palace  which  that  noble  citizen,  Mr. 
Carnegie,  has  given  for  its  dwelling  place.  We  see  that  this 


62 

help  comes  from  all  the  different  people  in  the  world  and  chiefly 
from  America.  I want  to  thank  you  again  for  this  manifestation 
which  shows  more  than  ever  that  you  believe  in  the  future,  not 
only  the  future  of  the  Hague  Conference,  but  of  all  the  organi- 
zations interested  in  establishing  peace.  They  will  succeed  in  the 
future  as  they  have  succeeded  so  rapidly  in  the  past,  through 
American  help. 

Mr.  Carnegie: 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : This  afternoon  we  had  the  great 
pleasure  and  privilege  of  hearing  a Cabinet  Minister  from  New 
York.  This  evening  we  are  to  have  a similar  pleasure  and  priv- 
ilege in  hearing  another  Cabinet  Minister  from  New  York.  I 
spoke  to-day,  when  Governor  Hughes  addressed  the  meeting,  of 
two  classes  of  politicians — one  who  sought  the  office,  and  the 
other  whom  the  office  sought.  The  office  sought  Governor 
Hughes,  it  sought  Mr.  Root,  and  it  also  sought  my  friend,  Mr. 
Straus,  whom  I now  have  the  great  pleasure  of  introducting 
to  you. 

The  Peace  of  Nations  and  Peace  Within  Nations 

Hon.  Oscar  S.  Straus 

Nations,  like  individuals,  pass  through  stages  of  development, 
and  each  stage  of  that  development  is  characterized  by  different 
and  often  varying  aspirations.  Beginning  with  modern  times, 
with  the  Reformation,  the  nations  were  held  under  the  spell  of 
ecclesiastical  domination,  which  produced  the  so-called  religious 
wars  which  culminated  with  the  Thirty  Years’  War  and  the  Treaty 
of  Westphalia.  This  was  followed  by  the  hunger  for  power, 
which  rose  to  its  height  under  the  infuriated  heroism  of  the 
Napoleonic  wars ; after  this  followed  the  period  of  industrial- 
ism and  trade  expansion,  at  the  height  of  which  we  now  find 
ourselves.  This  last  period,  which  has  witnessed  the  development 
of  great  industrial  combinations,  has  also  witnessed  the  develop- 
ment of  the  powers  of  the  wage-earners  under  organized  labor. 
This  development,  to  which  the  most  advanced  nations  of  the 
world  owe  the  wonderful  growth  of  their  material  prosperity, 
brings  with  it  many  advantages,  also  serious  dangers,  which,  if 
not  regulated  by  humane  considerations  and  by  the  spirit  of  equity 
and  justice,  threaten  the  most  serious  domestic  conflicts. 


63 

Unrest  and  dissatisfaction  at  home  breed  antagonisms  abroad. 
The  nation  happy  and  contented  within  its  borders  is  never  a 
menace  to  neighboring  nations.  Its  chief  danger  lies  in  not  being 
able  to  protect  itself  against  the  discontentment  of  other  nations, 
and  nothing  contributes  more  to  peace  than  peace  at  home.  Often 
in  the  past  has  a nation  gone  to  war  or  been  driven  into  war  by 
reason  of  internal  discontent,  compelling  it,  as  it  were,  to  choose 
war  without  as  the  lesser  evil  in  order  to  avert  revolution  within 
its  borders. 

On  the  loth  of  December  last  the  Committee  elected  by  the 
Norwegian  Storthing,  under  the  will  of  Alfred  Bernhard  Nobel, 
for  the  distribution  of  the  Peace  Prize  “to  be  awarded  to  the  person 
who  shall  have  most  or  best  promoted  the  fraternity  of  nations 
and  the  abolishment  or  diminution  of  standing  armies  and  the 
formation  and  increase  of  peace  congresses,”  awarded  its  prize 
to  the  person  who  did  most  throughout  the  entire  world  to  pro- 
mote those  objects,  and  selected  as  its  recipient  Theodore  Roose- 
velt, President  of  the  United  States.  The  people  throughout  this 
country  and  from  one  end  of  the  world  to  the  other  applaudingly 
approved  the  selection.  They  recognized  that  he  first,  among 
presidents,  kings  and  emperors,  opened  the  doors  of  the  Hague 
Tribunal;  that  he,  through  his  tactful  initiative  and  mediation, 
brought  about  peace  between  Japan  and  Russia,  and  that  he  was 
the  first  to  summon  the  second  great  peace  congress,  and  in  the 
interest  of  international  good  will  resigned  the  high  privilege  to 
the  Czar  of  Russia.  By  these  separate  acts  he  thrice  deserved  the 
gratitude  of  the  peace-loving  world  and  thrice  justified  the  award 
of  the  Norwegian  Storthing. 

Fully  as  important  as  peace  among  nations  is  peace  within 
nations.  People  who  are  subjected  to  unreasonable  restrictions 
upon  “life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness,”  and  who  are 
compelled  to  live  under  such  conditions  that  they  cannot  earn 
their  daily  bread,  become  revolutionary.  He  who  had  intervened 
and  brought  about  an  equitable  adjustment  in  the  greatest  indus- 
trial struggle  of  modern  times — the  anthracite  coal  strike — dedi- 
cated the  Nobel  Peace  Prize  to  the  promotion  of  industrial  peace, 
and  by  an  act  of  Congress  approved  March  2 last,  this  Founda- 
tion for  the  Promotion  of  Industrial  Peace  was  made  perpetual, 
with  the  purpose  of  aiding  the  industrial  forces  to  arrive  at  a 
peaceful  adjustment  of  their  reciprocal  rights  on  a basis  of 


64 

humanity  and  justice.  In  Theodore  Roosevelt  are  united  the 
historical  foresight  of  a Jefferson  with  the  humane  consideration 
of  a Lincoln  for  the  welfare  of  the  masses.  He  is  ever  watchful 
to  protect  the  poor  man  as  well  as  the  rich  man  in  his  rights  and 
to  restrain  them  from  committing  wrong. 

The  growth  of  commerce  and  industry  which  marks  our 
industrial  age  has  contributed  tremendously  to  the  community  of 
nations.  The  much  decried  commercial  spirit  is  the  surest 
guaranty  for  peace.  Before  its  development  the  panoplied  states- 
men believed  the  weaker  and  poorer  other  countries  were,  the 
stronger  and  mightier  would  be  their  own;  but  the  economics  of 
commerce  have  shown  that  the  wealth  and  progress  of  other  lands 
are  the  direct  source  of  wealth  and  progress  of  one's  own  land. 

The  wealth  and  happiness  of  nations  are  based  upon  factors 
that  are  international  as  well  as  intra-national ; in  other  words, 
they  depend  not  only  upon  domestic  commerce,  but  also  and  to 
an  equal  degree  upon  foreign  commerce.  As  an  illustration,  we 
have  only  to  take  into  consideration  the  fact  that  within  the  last 
forty  years  the  foreign  commerce  of  the  United  States  has  grown 
over  400  per  cent. — from  591  millions  in  1866  to  2,636  millions 
in  1905. 

Equally  important  with,  if  not  more  so  than,  the  limitation  of 
armaments  is  to  raise  the  standards  of  international  morality.  Let 
the  nations  exact  the  same  standard  from  one  another  as  they 
exact  from  their  own  subjects,  substitute  international  morality 
for  international  expediency,  and  they  will  have  instead  of  the 
arbitrament  of  war  the  arbitrament  of  law.  The  first  step  to  this 
end  is  to  enlarge  and  expand  the  laws  of  neutral  obligations.  Why 
should  a nation  be  permitted  to  go  to  war  to  collect  a debt  at  the 
mouth  of  a cannon  when  tnat  same  nation  will  not  allow  its  own 
subjects  to  collect  debts  from  one  another  with  swords  and 
pistols?  The  Drago  Doctrine  is  in  the  interest  of  international 
morality.  The  casuistry  of  international  pettifogism  has  whittled 
down  the  principles  of  international  law.  Natural  rights  have 
been  expanded  in  the  interest  of  greed,  and  neutral  obligations 
have  been  cramped  and  distorted,  so  that  as  the  law  stands  now 
neutral  nations  may  not  sell  ships  of  war  and  arms  to  belligerents, 
but  the  subjects  of  neutral  nations  may.  Neutral  nations  may  not 
grant  loans  and  subsidies  to  belligerents,  but  the  banker  subjects 
of  neutral  nations  may.  The  doctrine  recognized  under  all  sys- 


6S 

terns  of  law,  facit  per  alios  facit  per  se,  does  not  apply  to  inter- 
national relations,  because  international  relations  still  carry  the 
taints  of  unmoral  precedents  and  piratical  plunder. 

“The  true  end  of  every  great  and  free  people  should  be  self- 
respecting  peace.  * * * Probably  no  other  great  nation  of 

the  world  is  so  anxious  for  peace  as  we  are.”  These  are  the 
sentiments  of  President  Roosevelt  in  his  message  to  the  Fifty- 
seventh  Congress.  The  argument  that  war  will  kill  war  is  about 
as  sane  as  to  claim  that  contagion  will  cure  disease.  The  best 
guaranty  for  peace  is  peace,  and  the  very  fact  that  behind  the 
world’s  diplomacy  stand  ever  open  the  doors  of  the  Hague 
Tribunal,  whose  permanent  mission — the  peaceful  adjustment  of 
international  differences — cannot  fail  to  have  an  ever-increasing 
voice  in  the  chancelries  of  nations  and  in  elevating  the  inter- 
national morality  of  the  civilized  countries  of  the  world. 

Mr.  Carnegie  : 

How  much  good  it  does  the  speaker  when  he  has  to  stand 
up  and  bow  (this  was  said  apropos  of  Mr.  Straus’  being  compelled 
to  bow  in  response  to  the  applause  which  followed  his  address). 

Now,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen,  we  are  to  hear  from  Professor 
Miinsterberg,  whose  writings  most  of  you  are  familiar  with.  He 
comes  to-night  to  address  us,  and  give  us  the  German  view  of 
things. 

He  is  to  be  followed  by  Dr.  Richard,  the  first  President  of 
a Peace  Society  in  New  York — the  German  Peace  Society.  We 
shall  hear  from  Professor  Miinsterberg  of  Harvard  University. 

Germany : a Land  of  Peace  and  Industry 

Professor  Hugo  Munsterberg 

Mr.  President,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  Your  Congress 
has  honored  me  with  a generous  invitation  to  express  the  hope 
for  peace  from  a German  point  of  view.  Yet  the  leaders  of  the 
great  Congress  know  that  I am  in  no  sense  a delegate  of  the 
German  government  or  of  the  German  nation;  that  I can  speak 
only  as  one  of  the  masses  and,  moreover,  as  one  who  for  the 
larger  part  of  the  year  is  separated  by  the  ocean  from  his  Father- 
land.  But  I suppose  you  made  this  selection  because  my  profes- 
sional work  belongs  to  philosophy  and  I ought  therefore  to  be 
influenced  by  the  spirit  of  the  greatest  German  in  the  two  thousand 


5 


66 

years  of  German  history,  the  philosopher  Immanuel  Kant.  Kant’s 
book  on  “The  Eternal  Peace” — I do  not  forget,  Mr.  President, 
that  there  was  not  a little  Scotch  blood  in  his  veins — is  indeed  the 
profoundest  argument  which  has  been  brought  forward  for  the 
harmony  of  nations ; and  his  postulates,  of  which  the  entire 
abolition  of  standing  armies  is  only  one,  are  deduced  from  the 
supreme  principle  of  eternal  justice.  And  this  spirit  of  Kant, 
this  belief  in  justice,  and  this  abhorrence  of  immoral  wars,  is  still 
to-day  a deep  emotion  of  the  German  people.  Every  movement 
which  strengthens  moral  peace  on  earth,  therefore,  finds  in  us 
Germans  willing  friends  and  supporters. 

But  to  support  a movement  ought  to  mean,  first  of  all,  to 
remove  from  it  all  misunderstandings  and  all  illusions,  inasmuch 
as  every  illusion  must  ultimately  work  as  an  obstacle  to  real 
progress.  I therefore  feel  it  is  my  duty  to  point  first  to  some 
mistaken  arguments  by  which  the  missionaries  of  the  peace 
movement  too  often  weaken  their  influence  on  the  German  nation. 
I know,  of  course,  that  every  word  of  this  kind  must  be  unpopu- 
lar; yet  I say  it  frankly  at  once:  the  German  army  is  not  felt 
by  the  nation  as  a disagreeable  burden.  On  the  contrary,  the 
years  in  the  army  constitute  a national  school  time  which  keeps 
body  and  soul  in  strength  and  vigor.  The  years  in  the  army 
are  a time  of  pride  for  the  overwhelming  mass  of  the  German 
people.  In  the  same  way,  it  is  not  true  that  the  material  sacrifice 
has  become  too  exorbitant.  Germany  is  prosperous  to-day  and 
the  expenses  of  the  army  are  felt  by  the  nation  hardly  more 
than  fire  insurance  is  felt  by  a good  householder.  Nor  does 
the  time  lost  through  the  years  of  service  much  impair  the 
national  economy  in  a country  whose  population  grows  so  rapidly. 
And  even  if  it  ever  came  to  war,  the  mere  question  of  loss  of 
property  and  life  would  not  count  overmuch.  Disease  and  even 
recklessness  kill  many  more  in  the  midst  of  hopeful  life.  Ameri- 
can railroads  have  brought  more  avoidable  injury  and  death  than 
American  cannons,  and  the  progress  of  German  pathology 
through  the  work  of  Virchow,  Koch,  Behring,  etc.,  has  saved 
more  lives  than  the  avoidance  of  the  last  wars  could  have  done. 

Such  materialistic  arguments  must  remain  ever  ineffective 
if  the  core  of  the  German  nation  is  to  be  reached.  For  the  best 
Germans  it  is  entirely  a moral  question,  as  it  was  with  Kant. 
But  just  therefore  it  is  impossible  for  the  German  to  say  that 


67 

war  is  the  worst  evil  under  all  circumstances.  Immanuel  Kant 
had  no  more  idealistic  apostles  than  Schiller  and  Fichte.  But 
it  was  Fichte,  more  than  any  one,  who,  by  his  orations  to  the 
German  nation,  stirred  his  countrymen  to  the  war  which  liberated 
the  indignant  people  from  the  humiliation  of  Napoleon’s  yoke; 
and  Schiller  cried  unto  the  soul  of  every  German  youth : Infam- 
ous the  nation  which  does  not  sacrifice  everything  for  her  moral 
integrity.  To  the  German,  war  seems  like  a disease  which 
threatens  life,  but  with  Schiller,  he  feels  that  life  is  not  the  great- 
est of  all  good,  and  that  the  greatest  of  all  evils  is  unrighteousness 
If  these  idealistic  convictions  of  the  German  soul  were  better 
understood,  the  friends  of  peace  would  be  much  better  able  to  put 
the  lever  on  the  right  spot  instead  of  losing  ground  by  useless 
appeals  to  merely  utilitarian  motives. 

But  just  because  war  and  peace  are  for  the  soul  of  the 
German  nation  first  of  all  an  ethical  problem,  it  is  utterly  absurd 
to  be  suspicious  of  German  motives  and  to  look  to  Germany  as 
a possible  source  of  danger  to  the  peace  of  the  world.  Mr. 
President,  I do  not  hesitate  to  claim  that  there  is  no  firmer 
bulwark  of  peace  than  the  good  will  and  sincerity  of  the  whole 
German  nation,  and  there  is  no  more  reckless  and  more  inex- 
cusable menace  to  peace  than  the  foolish  denunciation  of  German 
motives  which  abounds  in  the  newspapers  and  assemblies  of 
many  lands,  and  of  America  not  least.  Unfair  rumors  are  easily 
started,  and  denials  follow  slowly  and  clumsily;  Mr.  President, 
we  need  a simplified  denying  board.  I said  the  central  motive 
of  Germany’s  desire  not  to  disturb  the  peace  is  her  strong  will 
for  righteousness;  but  let  us  not  forget  that  even  if  that  were 
lacking  there  is  nothing  which  might  spur  the  German  mind  to 
an  avoidable  war.  The  Latin  temperament  is  easily  excited,  but 
the  German  is  phlegmatic;  the  Anglo-Saxon  temperament  likes 
betting  and  sport  and  seeks  to  outdo  a rival,  but  the  quiet  Ger- 
mans prefer  to  do  the  good  things  for  their  own  sake.  There 
may  be  peoples  which  need  war  to  overcome  internal  troubles, 
but  the  German  inner  life  is  prosperous  and  harmonious:  there 
may  be  peoples  which  seek  war  for  'expansion,  but  the  Germans 
have  large  colonies,  the  building  up  of  which  is  still  to  do  and 
occupies  them  fully.  The  whole  national  life  is  adjusted  to 
assiduous  labor  which  needs  the  repose  of  peace.  Commerce 
and  industry,  science  and  art,  law  and  religion,  inner  freedom 


68 


and  social  harmonization  engage  the  German  mind  to-day  more 
earnestly  and  intensely  than  ever  before;  its  inner  and  outer 
development  were  never  before  moving  on  in  such  a wonderful 
rhythm;  there  is  the  one  need  only,  to  be  left  in  the  sunshine 
of  peace.  And  whoever  has  the  hallucination  of  secret  disturbing 
plans  brooding  in  Germany  falsifies  history  and  endangers  the 
future. 

It  does  not  follow  that  everyone  in  Germany  is  enthusiastic 
over  every  scheme  of  arbitration,  although  the  movement  for 
international  arbitration  has  a daily  growing  body  of  warm  sup- 
porters in  Germany.  There  lurks  still  the  instinctive  feeling  in 
some  German  quarters  that  it  is  impossible  to  give  an  international 
court  the  same  degree  of  impartiality  which  we  expect  from  a 
civil  judge;  the  interests  of  all  nations  are  too  much  interwoven; 
the  judge  is  always  to  a certain  degree,  a party.  The  forcing 
of  the  issue  to  arbitration  sometimes  suggests,  therefore,  the 
suspicion  of  selfish  politics.  Not  everybody  desires,  moreover, 
for  patriotic  conflicts  the  arts  of  wrangling  attorneys  and  of 
dissenting  experts  who  may  have  to  decide  whether  or  not  there 
was  a national  brain  storm  going  on.  The  Germans  feel,  there- 
fore, that  there  is  one  way  still  better  than  to  arbitrate  in  quarrels, 
namely,  to  avoid  quarrels  from  the  start. 

Do  not  German  tariff  negotiations  with  the  United  States 
testify  to  this  point?  Yes,  does  not  history  show  it  everywhere 
with  proud  and  blessed  results?  If  we  look  back  over  the  last 
third  of  a century,  we  see  great  and  minor  wars.  England, 
Russia,  Turkey,  Italy,  Spain,  France,  Japan,  China,  even  America, 
had  wars,  but  the  German  nation  went  quietly  along  in  peace. 
And  the  spirit  of  this  new  Germany  which  longs  to  work  and  not 
to  quarrel,  has  found  its  highest  symbol  in  the  genius  on  the 
Empire’s  throne.  How  did  the  prejudices  of  the  world  denounce 
him  as  the  war  lord  of  our  time,  and  how  has  he  shown  in  firm- 
ness and  strength  that  his  reign  is  the  most  powerful  influence 
for  peace  and  international  friendship!  This  country  knows  the 
story ; this  country  knows  how  the  Emperor  sent  here  his  brother 
and  his  friends,  sent  scholars  and  artists,  sent  sporting  yachts, 
and  museum  treasures,  and  a warship  only  to  go  to  the  peaceful 
celebration  of  Jamestown.  It  is  high  time  to  drown  the  wicked 
prejudices;  if  the  world  could  see  at  last  the  true  spirit  of 
Germany,  freed  from  all  willful  distortion,  a mighty  step  forward 


6g 

would  be  secured  in  your  holy  movement.  Yes,  if  a sculptor  were 
to  create  to-day  a statue  of  the  Goddess  of  Peace,  he  might  safely 
choose  as  his  model  fair  Germania,  with  the  Emperor’s  crown 
on  her  head,  with  a pure  sword  in  her  hand,  and  with  mild  eyes 
calmly  looking  on  a serious  yet  happy  nation  of  laborers  who 
work  for  the  eternal  good  of  peaceful  civilization. 

Mr.  Carnegie: 

I had  occasion  this  afternoon  to  call  attention  to  the  fact 
which  the  Professor  referred  to  just  now,  that  the  Emperor  had 
been  on  the  throne  nearly  twenty  years  yet  his  hands  were  guilt- 
less of  human  blood. 

With  much  that  he  has  said,  of  course,  I am  in  full  accord, 
because  I have  tried  my  best  in  writing  to  Great  Britain  to 
convince  them  that  they  were  most  unjust  to  Germany  and  to 
her  Emperor.  I believe  he  is  a son  of  destiny;  that  he  has  it  in 
his  power  to-day  to  bring  Peace  upon  earth.  His  sin  may  be  the 
sin  of  omission  if  he  does  not  exert  that  power.  Let  the  German 
Emperor  to-day  say  to  Britain,  to  France,  to  America:  “Come, 
let  us  declare  to  the  world  that  nations  are  interdependent  and 
rapidly  becoming  more  so.  No  nation  has  the  right  to  disturb 
the  general  peace  of  the  world,  in  which  every  nation  is  more  or 
less  concerned.” 

Should  the  German  Emperor  say  that,  we  could  repeat 
what  we  did  in  China  when  a German  general  led  the  forces 
of  six  great  nations  to  accomplish  a successful  mission.  The 
easiest  and  best  way  of  accomplishing  Peace  on  earth  is  to  have 
an  international  police  force  to  be  used  as  the  last  resort.  The 
nation  which  breaks  the  Peace  would  then  be  punished. 

I have  heard  Professor  Munsterberg  make  the  most  extra- 
ordinary statement  that  I have  heard  for  a long  time : that  con- 
scription in  Germany  was  not  regarded  as  a great  burden.  I 
should  like  to  have  the  gentleman  visit  our  mills  in  Pittsburg 
and  ask  thousands  and  thousands  of  Germans  what  influenced 
them  to  leave  Germany  for  this  land.  (Patting  Professor 
Munsterberg  on  the  shoulder.)  (Applause.) 

I had  in  the  beginning  a German  partner — I have  had  many 
German  partners  and  several  of  them  are  millionaires  to-day — 
and  I have  asked  them  and  also  the  men  in  the  mills : “What 
made  you  leave  Germany?”  and  they  have  answered:  “Mr. 


70 

Carnegie,  I have  two  boys;  I would  not  have  them  in  the  bar- 
racks.” (Applause.)  You  know  little  of  this  when  you  sit  in 
your  studies  and  write  from  your  own  minds,  but  the  man  of 
affairs  knows  whether  conscription  in  Germany  is  a burden  or 
not;  and  I have  said  to  myself  what  Bismarck  said:  “America 
is  draining  Germany  of  its  best  blood” ; we  were,  and  are, 
57,000  on  the  average  leave  Germany  every  year,  and  20,000 
come  under  the  Stars  and  Stripes.  I wish  there  were  as  many 
millions  of  them. 

I appreciate  the  German  Emperor  as  much  as  Professor 
Miinsterberg  does.  I have  faith  in  the  German  Emperor,  as 
he  has,  and  I look  to  him  to  play  a great  part  in  the  world;  but 
it  is  too  late  in  the  day  for  any  professor  to  tell  me  that  con- 
scription is  not  draining  Germany  of  its  best  blood.  I go  against 
his  theory  and  give  you  facts. 

I will  now  call  upon  another  German,  the  first  man  to  organ- 
ize a German-American  Peace  Society,  Dr.  Ernst  Richard. 

Germany  and  America 

Dr.  Ernst  Richard. 

Professor  Miinsterberg  has  talked  to  you  on  behalf  of  his 
countrymen  in  Germany ; he  has  described  to  you  what  is,  unhap- 
pily but  most  decidedly,  the  attitude  of  many  thinking  Germans 
to-day  in  regard  to  the  question  of  peace  or  war.  If  you  will 
review  the  history  of  Germany  for  the  last  three  hundred  years 
and  see  the  misery,  the  depredations  on  property,  the  humiliations 
Germany  has  had  to  suffer,  when  it  was  not  strong  enough  to 
defend  itself,  you  will  understand  why  it  is  that  Germans  are 
not  over-ready  to  trust  in  the  peaceful  assertions  of  their  neigh- 
bors. 

This  feeling  is  not  peculiar  to  the  Germans,  you  may  see 
from  the  fact  that  even  those  countries  whose  neutrality  is  guar- 
anteed by  all  the  great  powers  surrounding  them,  maintain  a 
military  establishment  that  burdens  them  to  the  extent  of  their 
economic  capacity  and  beyond.  But  Kant,  our  great  philosopher, 
has  not  been  forgotten  in  Germany,  and  there  are  to-day  an 
increasing  number  of  Germans  who  know  that  better  ways  exist 
to  secure  peace  than  militarism ; who  know  as  well  as  we  do,  in 
spite  of  all  possible  assertions  of  military  statesmen,  that  soldiers 


7 1 

are  no  instruments  of  peace.  To  speak  with  Elbert  Hubbard, 
soldiers  who  do  not  like  to  fight  are  like  preachers  who  do  not 
like  to  preach,  like  musicians  who  do  not  care  for  the  art  of  music. 

I am  talking  to  you  in  behalf  of  those  Germans,  and  perhaps 
I may  say  of  all  those  of  foreign  nationality  who  have  come  here 
and  have  forgotten  their  antagonism  without  giving  up  their 
national  traditions.  As  far  as  they  are  in  agreement  with  pro- 
gressive and  liberal  institutions  they  are  united  as  good  citizens 
into  one  great  nation  of  the  United  States  of  America.  (Ap- 
plause.) We  who  come  from  monarchical  countries  are  wide- 
awake to  the  fact  that  in  countries  of  monarchical  traditions  the 
responsibilities  of  sovereignty  rest  on  the  shoulders  of  the  admin- 
istration; but  in  a democracy  like  ours  they  rest  on  the  people, 
they  rest  on  ourselves.  If  we  go  to  war,  we  cannot  blame  our 
administration,  we  have  to  blame  ourselves ; and  if  this  national 
congress  has  any  meaning  whatever  it  is  to  tell  our  mandatories 
in  Washington  that  we  feel  the  people  of  the  United  States  are 
with  us  in  demanding  that  our  representatives  to  the  Second 
Hague  Conference  shall  be  as  they  have  been  in  the  past,  the 
leaders  in  the  reforms  of  international  relations.  (Applause.) 

I have  been  introduced  to  you  as  President  of  the  German- 
American  Peace  Society,  but  I should  like  to  tell  you  that  the 
name  “German-American”  does  not  in  this  instance,  even  in  an 
ethnological  sense,  mean  a distinction  from  our  fellow  citizens, 
but  a recognition  of  the  fact  that  we  who  have  descended  from 
German  stock  are  the  natural  bond  of  an  ever-increasing  friend- 
ship between  America  and  Germany.  We  hope  that  our  fellow 
citizens  of  other  nationalities  will  follow  our  example,  and  that 
altogether  we  may  point  to  this  object  lesson  of  the  solidarity  of 
the  nations  in  our  United  States  of  America  and  ask:  “Why  are 
there  not  United  States  of  Europe ?”  (Applause.) 

When  we  started,  we  found  the  first  thing  to  do  in  this 
American  city  was  to  have  an  American  Peace  Society  right 
amongst  us,  a purely  American  Peace  Society,  and  if  we  have 
done  nothing  else  we  have  founded  the  Peace  Society  of  the 
City  of  New  York,  which  fathers  this  congress,  and  so  we  may 
very  well  call  ourselves  the  grandparents  of  this  National  Arbi- 
tration and  Peace  Congress. 

Perhaps  it  is  not  accidental  that  German-Americans  should 
be  the  first  to  have  entered  this  field,  since  Germany  and  America 


72 

have  progressed  arm  in  arm  in  the  paths  of  peace  since  these 
United  States  have  been  recognized  as  one  of  the  sovereign 
nations  of  the  world. 

Practically  the  first  state  that  recognized  the  sovereignty 
of  the  United  States,  and  gave  expression  to  this  recognition, 
was  the  state  of  Frederick  the  Great,  from  whose  reign  Ger- 
many took  its  new  flight  of  progress  and  growth.  At  the  same 
time  the  American  eagle  began  to  spread  its  wings,  and  it  is 
very  appropriate  to  recall  on  this  occasion  one  clause  of  the 
treaty  of  1785  which,  as  far  as  I know,  is  legally  in  force  to-day; 
the  clause  which  expresses  the  principle  for  which  this  nation 
has  stood  since  its  birth,  and  which,  up  to  this  time,  has  not  been 
acknowledged  as  an  integral  part  of  international  law.  In  this 
treaty  of  1785  the  United  States  and  Prussia  (which  stands  for 
the  Germany  of  to-day)  guaranteed  mutually  the  inviolability  of 
private  property  at  sea.  As  the  international  law  stands  to-day, 
your  house  and  its  contents  may  be  safe  from  the  attacks  of  an 
army  in  time  of  war,  if  you  are  a private  citizen,  but  it  will  not 
be  safe  against  the  shells  of  a warship,  and  your  merchantmen, 
no  matter  how  harmless  are  the  goods  they  carry,  may  be 
destroyed  or  robbed  by  the  enemy  or  his  privateers  at  any  time 
during  the  war.  We  hear  so  much  of  the  question  of  national 
honor  on  the  part  of  those  who  want  to  reserve  at  least  a few 
cases  in  which  they  can  legally  fly  at  each  other’s  throats.  If 
there  ever  were  a question  of  national  honor  for  the  United 
States  it  is  to  assert  this  principle  which  it  has  held  up  to  the 
nations  since  the  first  days  of  its  existence,  and  which  stands 
again  on  the  platform  of  the  next  Hague  Conference.  It  seems 
to  me  that,  above  all,  our  delegates  ought  to  be  instructed  to  see 
that  at  last  this  principle  shall  be  acknowledged  by  the  agreement 
of  the  civilized  nations. 

I appeal  to  you,  the  representatives  of  the  magnanimous 
nation,  related  both  to  Germany  and  to  America,  to  the  represen- 
tatives of  Great  Britain,  to  raise  your  voice  in  the  councils  of 
your  nation  and  take  care  that  at  the  next  Hague  Conference 
the  only  great  Power  which  has  been  in  the  way  of  the  estab- 
lishment of  this  great  principle  will  at  last  give  up  its  resistance 
and  thus  show  to  all  the  world  that  its  will  for  peace  is  really 
“indomitable”  and  “invincible.” 


73 

Our  country  and  Germany  have  adhered  to  this  rule  since  it 
was  laid  down  in  that  treaty  of  1785  and  have  acted  accordingly 
throughout  their  history. 

Let  me  tell  you  that  there  is  only  one  way  leading  to  disarma- 
ment or  to  the  limitation  of  armament,  and  that  is  to  take  away 
excuses  for  armament  and  to  trust  to  the  common  sense  of  the 
German  people  and  all  the  other  peoples  who  show  that  they 
want  to  advance  in  the  ways  of  peace  and  civilization,  and  to 
drop  the  military  burden  when  they  see  that  it  is  not  necessary. 
The  danger  to  private  property  affords  the  most  frequent  and 
the  most  dangerous  excuse  for  the  increase  at  least  of  naval 
armaments.  But  we  must  hurry  that  events  shall  not  overtake 
our  efforts  at  peaceful  settlement.  New  ties  of  international 
friendship,  of  common  interests  are  being  formed.  International 
institutions  are  in  existence  to-day  supported  by  all  or  at  least 
a great  number  of  the  great  nations  of  the  world  which  will 
lead  inevitably  to  a World  Organization  such  as  we  dream  of  as 
our  ideal. 

A few  months  ago  there  were  unveiled  two  monuments  over 
the  graves  of  French  soldiers  who  had  died  on  German  soil 
during  the  war  of  1870,  and  it  was  on  this  occasion,  speaking  on 
behalf  of  the  Emperor,  that  a German  general,  depositing  a 
wreath  on  the  grave,  said : “What  is  the  language  of  these  monu- 
ments? That  it  is  not  by  battles  but  by  a pacific  union  that 
the  peoples  of  Europe  will  after  this  accomplish  their  high 
mission  of  civilization  and  of  progress,  which  calls  them  and 
claims  all  their  efforts.”  I conclude  with  these  words  of  the 
German  Emperor,  with  this  change,  that  we  do  not  speak  of  the 
pacific  union  of  the  people  of  Europe  alone,  but  of  the  pacific 
union  of  the  whole  civilized  world. 

Before  I close  let  me  refer  to  the  part  the  German  Emperor 
took  in  the  great  work  of  concluding  the  Peace  of  Portsmouth, 
when  President  Roosevelt  found  it  impossible  to  finish  his  task 
and  the  Russian  representative  had  received  orders  to  leave 
within  three  days.  It  was  then  that  our  President  appealed  to 
the  German  Emperor  to  help  him  with  his  influence,  and  through 
his  successful  intervention  the  baneful  order  was  withdrawn. 
(Applause.) 

Thus,  you  may  say  at  the  beginning  of  our  national  existence 
as  well  as  at  the  present  time,  we  find  the  United  States  and 


74 

Germany  shoulder  to  shoulder  in  the  task  of  promoting  peace 
and  diminishing  the  horrors  of  war ; and  as  a testimony  for  the 
spirit  of  this  so-called  “War  Lord/’  let  me  say  to  you  that  in 
spite  of  the  dreadful  military  power  behind  which  Germany  tries 
to  guard  itself,  our  own  ideals  of  the  World’s  Federation  are 
alive  there  as  well  as  here. 

Mr.  Carnegie: 

There  is  some  complaint  from  the  gallery  that  they  do  not 
hear  these  speakers  well.  Now,  we  have  an  original  in  the 
gallery,  Mr.  Stead,  and  he  suggests  that  he  will  speak  from  where 
he  stands,  and  enable  his  neighbors  to  hear  the  weighty  message 
he  is  going  to  deliver.  I have  great  pleasure  in  introducing  to 
you  one  of  the  most  ardent  spirits  I know  among  all  my  friends. 
(Great  Applause.) 

Mr.  Stead: 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  I don’t  know 
whether  everyone  in  this  great  hall  can  hear  my  voice,  speaking 
as  I do,  but  if  I should,  by  any  accident,  drop  my  voice  so  that 
you  cannot  hear  it,  will  you  be  good  enough  to  shout  out  quick 
and  sharp  “speak  up.”  (Laughter.)  I have  ten  minutes  allotted 
to  me  in  which  to  speak  to  you,  so  I beg  you  sincerely  not  to 
rob  me  of  any  of  my  ten  minutes  by  any  applause.  Now,  Mr. 
Chairman,  will  you  kindly  look  at  your  watch  and  if  they  take 
any  of  my  ten  minutes,  will  you  add  that  on?  (Laughter.) 

I am  here,  in  a certain  sense,  not  as  the  representative  of  the 
British  government;  I never  represented  a government  in  my 
life,  and  I hope  sincerely  I never  shall  (laughter),  preferring, 
as  I do,  the  position  of  much  greater  freedom  than  that  which 
belongs  to  any  representative  of  any  government.  No,  I speak 
not  for  the  government,  I speak  for  the  people.  (Applause.)  I 
stand  here  as  an  Englishman  to  appeal  to  you  who  are  all  or 
almost  all  English-speaking  people,  to  join  hand  in  hand  with  my 
countrymen  to  make  this  next  Hague  Conference  even  more 
memorable  in  the  history  of  the  world  than  the  first  Hague  Con- 
ference, which  owed  its  success,  not  its  initiative,  but  its  success 
to  the  fact  that  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain  stood  together 
hand  in  hand  as  brothers  true  and  tried  before  the  nations  of  the 
world. 

The  first  thing  to  be  done  is  to  have  a program.  Although 


75 

I was  delighted  with  the  Chairman’s  fraternal  rebuke  to  Professor 
Miinsterberg,  nevertheless  I was  extremely  glad  to  hear  what 
Professor  Miinsterberg  said,  because  he  reminded  you  of  some 
facts,  which,  in  a meeting  like  this  where  we  are  all  very  enthusi- 
astic and  very  much  of  one  mind,  we  are  apt  to  forget — he 
reminded  you,  for  instance,  that  in  a meeting  which  wishes  to  do 
anything  practical,  the  word  “disarmament”  should  never  be  spoken 
at  all.  (Applause.)  I have  been  around  Europe  and  I have  talked 
in  every  capital  of  Europe,  and  I came  to  hate  the  word  disarma- 
ment as  a devil  hates  holy  water  (laughter),  because  the  moment 
you  talk  about  disarmament,  people  think  you  are  going  to  ask 
them  to  disband  their  armies,  and  stand  defenseless  against  their 
neighbors  whom  they  do  not  trust.  I suppose  no  government 
in  the  world  is  going  to  propose  this  at  the  Hague  Conference, 
no  government  in  the  world,  certainly  not  our  own,  is  going 
to  be  so  foolish  as  to  run  its  head  against  a stone  wall  by  pro- 
posing that  any  power  should  disarm.  Now,  you  don’t  like  that, 
some  of  you  (laughter),  but  it  is  a hard,  cold  fact.  What  are 
we,  then,  going  to  propose  ft — not  that  there  should  be  any  dis- 
armaments, not  that  there  should  be  any  reduction  of  armaments ; 
but  simply  that  we  should  attempt  to  agree  to  prevent  the  con- 
tinual, the  mad,  reckless  increase  of  armaments  which  goes  on 
year  after  year.  (Applause.) 

It  was  proposed  at  the  last  Hague  Conference  that  the 
Powers  should  arrest  their  armaments;  everyone  agreed  that  it 
was  very  necessary,  but  they  could  not  agree  as  to  the  form  in 
which  it  was  to  be  arranged,  so  it  was  referred  to  each  of  the 
governments  to  decide,  to  discuss,  and  to  arrange.  Ever  since, 
the  cost  of  armaments  has  gone  up  steadily,  averaging  for  the 
last  eight  years  fifty  million  dollars  a year  increase  over  and 
above  that  which  was  regarded  in  1898  as  an  intolerable  burden. 

Professor  Miinsterberg  said  that  the  Germans  regarded  the 
cost  of  the  army  and  navy  as  insurance  against  fire  risks.  I 
agree,  but  is  it  rational  that  when  a fire  risk  has  gone  down,  the 
insurance  premium  should  go  up?  (Laughter — applause.)  Are 
we  not  as  business  men,  practical  men,  entitled  to  ask  that  we 
should  at  least  discuss  whether  in  proportion  as  the  world  grows 
more  peaceful,  we  might  not  at  least  arrange  to  stand  by  the 
maximum  we  have  at  present  arrived  at  and  agree  for  the  term 
of  the  next  five  years  that  we  will  not  exceed  it?  Believe  me, 


7 6 

for  two  months  there  has  been  very  little  else  debated  and  argued 
between  the  great  powers  of  Europe,  except  whether  or  not  we 
should  have  permission  even  to  discuss  that,  because  Professor 
Munsterberg’s  country  did  not  think  it  was  a practical  proposition. 
Now,  so  much  for  argument. 

There  is  another  question.  Professor  Miinsterberg  told  us, 
and  I believe,  quite  truly,  that  the  German  Emperor  is  a friend 
of  peace.  I know  that  when  I was  in  Germany  I found  the 
opinion  of  the  Germans  upon  that  subject  absolutely  unanimous; 
and  many  of  the  Germans  with  whom  I talked  admitted  it  rue- 
fully, not  liking  it  at  all,  saying  that  they  thought  that  their 
Emperor’s  peace-loving  character  was  so  well  known  by  other 
nations  that  they  traded  upon  it.  (Laughter.)  But  all  the  same, 
Professor  Miinsterberg  will  admit  that  twelve  months  ago  this 
very  time  there  was  hardly  a Frenchman  in  all  France  who 
did  not  open  his  newspaper  every  morning  expecting  to  find 
that  the  peace-loving  Emperor  had  landed  his  indomitable  army 
across  the  French  frontiers.  And  why  was  there  that  dread? 
Why  was  there  that  great  fear?  I was  talking  to  the  most 
capable  Foreign  Minister  of  the  German  Empire.  He  admitted 
it  was  perfectly  true  the  French  did  fear  war  was  coming  with 
Germany,  that  the  German  troops  were  meditating  full  march 
on  Paris  at  any  moment;  but  he  said  there  was  no  ground  for 
that  because  he  said  he  had  been  with  the  Emperor  during  the 
whole  of  that  three  months  and'  never  by  word  or  sign  did  the 
Emperor  ever  show  to  even  his.  most  trusted  Minister  that  he 
regarded  war  with  France  a possibility.  (Applause.) 

If  there  could  be  that  great  misunderstanding  and  dread, 
that  great  horror  of  a possible  war,  which  was  not  by  any  means 

confined  to  France,  but  existed  in  many  other  countries 

My  time  is  up.  (Cries  of  “Go  on!  Go  on!”) 

Mr.  Carnegie  : 

That  man  Stead  could  keep  you  here  an  hour ; he  is  wonder- 
ful, and  he  has  been  speaking  ever  since  he  landed  in  this  country ; 
and  some  of  us,  careful  of  his  health,  are  taking  care  to  limit 
him.  Besides,  we  have  other  speakers  and  I would  like  very 
much  to  hear  him  myself,  but  I must  really  ask  you  to  allow  the 


From  Stereograph,  Copyright  1907,  by  Underwood  & Underwood,  New  York 

W.  T.  Stead  Dr.  John  Rhys 

Col.  Sir  Robert  Cranston 

Sir  William  Henry  Preece,  F.R.S.  Sir  Robert  Ball,  F.R.S. 


IHl  UBBfcW 
Of  f«t 

unemot  of  »u-wo,s 


77 

other  speakers  to  speak;  it  is  now  after  io  o’clock,  and  all  well- 
regulated  families  should  have  the  heads  of  the  families  at  home 
before  n o’clock.  We  will  now  hear 

Mr.  Stead  : 

Mr.  Carnegie,  just  one  word  more:  I have  obeyed  and  am 
always  ready  to  obey  the  ruling  of  the  Chair,  but  I wish  to  make 
a suggestion  to  the  Chair  that  when  he  exercises  his  rulings  and 
insists,  quite  properly,  upon  the  time  table  being  adhered  to,  he 
should  not  apply  it  so  hard  upon  me  as  to  put  it  upon  his 
regard  for  my  health;  and  I have  further  to  say  to  you  that  as 
he  has  done  so,  I only  think  it  right  to  make  this  fair  offer  to  him 
and  this  meeting,  that  after  you  have  gotten  through  with  the 
other  speakers  to-night,  if  you  would  like  to  stop  and  hear  me, 
I am  game  to  speak  as  long  as  you  will  listen. 

Mr.  Carnegie: 

Mr.  Stead  is  going  to  have  numerous  opportunities  to  speak 
at  other  meetings ; we  are  holding  him  in  reserve. 

I have  now  the  honor  of  calling  upon  Colonel  Sir  Robert 
Cranston,  Ex-Lord  Provost  of  Edinburgh.  You  have  not  heard 
one  word  from  Scotland  to-night.  You  have  heard  from  Germany, 
and  you  have  heard  from  England,  and  now  you  will  listen  for 
a few  minutes  to  a word  from  Scotland,  so  I call  upon  the  next 
speaker,  Sir  Robert  Cranston,  of  Edinburgh,  to  speak  for  ten 
minutes. 

Sir  Robert  Cranston  : 

Mr.  President,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : I would  very 
much  rather  that  Mr.  Stead  had  gone  on.  He  plays  the  game 
so  well  that  there  is  no  chance  for  a serious  man  to  come  in.  I 
can  say  that  to  him,  and  he  won’t  be  offended ; I know  all  about 
him;  but  it  is  hardly  fair  that  after  you  have  heard  from  all  the 
other  countries  in  the  world,  except  Scotland,  that  I should  come 
in  at  the  tail  end,  after  every  argument  has  been  given  and 
everything  has  been  said  that  could  possibly  be  said. 

I remember  the  story  of  a gentleman  dying  and  leaving  his 
family  of  seven  to  select  from  what  he  had  left,  beginning  with 
the  eldest.  I am  exactly  in  the  position  of  the  seventh,  who 
found  very  little  left  to  select  from.  I think  I speak  pretty  well 
for  the  nation  to  which  I belong,  perhaps  the  nation  in  the  world 


7§ 

above  all  other  nations,  which  has  given  the  most  blood  for  civil 
and  religious  liberty,  when  I say  that  they  would  to-morrow 
welcome  peace  throughout  the  world. 

I am  also  thoroughly  convinced  (and  I stand  in  a rather 
peculiar  position)  that  there  exists  no  man,  whether  in  France, 
Germany,  America  or  anywhere  else,  that  is  a stronger  advocate 
of  peace  than  King  Edward,  who  prays  night  and  day  for  the 
welfare  of  his  people  and  for  universal  peace. 

You  know  as  well  as  I do  that  the  time  for  disarmament 
has  not  yet  come.  I understand  that  this  meeting  is  a meeting 
to  protest  against  war,  regarding  a state  of  peace  as  the  logical 
well-being  of  every  nation. 

Someone  has  said:  “Give  me  the  money  that  has  been  spent 
in  war,  and  I will  purchase  every  foot  of  land  upon  the  globe ; 
I will  clothe  every  man,  woman  and  child  in  an  attire  of  which 
kings  and  queens  would  be  proud ; I will  build  a school-house  on 
every  hillside  and  in  every  valley  over  the  whole  earth ; I will 
build  an  academy  in  every  town  and  endow  a college  in  every 
State.” 

I do  not  wish  to  be  a sycophant  to  you  or  any  other  man 
in  this  country  or  in  any  other  country,  but  I believe  the  way 
to  obtain  peace  has  been  taken  by  the  man  who  occupies  the 
Chair  to-night  (applause)  ; it  is  to  build  libraries,  endow  schools, 
erect  colleges  and  try  to  permeate  every  man  and  woman  with 
the  higher  ideals  of  life,  then  armaments  will  fall  to  pieces;  for, 
peace  having  been  declared  between  nation  and  nation,  there 
will  be  no  further  need  for  armament  or  for  discussion  of  arma- 
ment. (Applause.)  I believe  honestly  and  truly  that  so  long 
as  we  have  people  whose  money  is  spent  for  the  welfare  of  the 
people  in  the  way  it  has  been  spent  in  this  country  and  in  many 
other  countries,  so  long  as  we  have  big-hearted  monarchs  or 
Presidents  of  Republics,  as  they  may  be,  and  governments  full 
of  heart  and  soul,  telling  the  people  what  they  should  live  up  to, 
and  ministers  of  the  Gospel  telling  men  how  to  live  rather  than 
how  to  die  (applause)  we  will  have  an  exemplification  of  justice 
between  man  and  man.  To  me  it  is  the  realization  of  the  words 
that  Burns  wrote,  137  years  ago: 

“It  is  coming  yet  for  a’  that 
For  man  to  man  the  world  o’er 
Shall  brothers  be  for  a’  that.” 


79 

Mr.  Carnegie: 

Well,  I am  not  so  sorry  now  as  I thought  I was,  and  as  you 
thought  you  were  when  Mr.  Stead  was  stopped;  I think  we  got 
as  good  an  oration,  equal  even  to  anything  that  that  celebrated 
orator  could  have  given  us. 

Gentlemen,  we  have  with  us  to-night  a man  who  has  made 
a deep  impression  upon  us  in  the  literary  field;  he  was  at  Pitts- 
burg, and  I heard  him  the  other  night  make  his  first  speech  in 
public,  and  I have  had  a great  many  requests  from  others  that 
he  should  be  heard  on  the  metropolitan  stage.  We  give  him 
now  the  finest  audience  that  he  can  find,  and  we  ask  him  for  ten 
minutes  to  say  a few  words  to  us — Mr.  “Maarten  Maartens.” 

“Maarten  Maartens”  (Mr.  Van  der  Poorten-Schwartz)  : 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : My  rising  here 
to  speak  at  all,  is,  when  you  look  at  it  properly  and  rationally, 
quite  a strong  argument  for  the  impression  made  by  this  great 
movement;  for,  as  you  have  just  heard,  I never  spoke  in  public 
before  I came  to  America  a few  days  ago,  and  the  chances  are 
ten  to  one  that  when  I once  leave  the  country  I shall  never  speak 
in  public  again.  I have  no  claim  upon  your  attention,  these  are 
important  matters  that  are  before  you;  all  the  men  who  have 
spoken  hitherto  are  men  who  have  spoken  officially  or  have  done 
something  in  this  great  work.  Why  do  I speak  at  all? — it  is, 
I think,  because  when  this  demand  for  peace  comes  before  us,  no 
man  who  thinks  or  speaks  has  a right  to  keep  silent..  It  is  because 
we  are  disciples,  for  I am  one  of  you ; I am  not  one  of  the  gentle- 
men who  know  all  about  the  matter,  but  I am  one  of  the  audience, 
and  possibly  it  is  because  we  people  at  last  have  begun  to  see 
that  if  we  kept  silent,  the  stones  would  cry  out. 

It  is  only  a very  short  time  ago  that  I trod  the  deck  of  one 
of  the  great  Atlantic  liners;  I saw  how  much  has  been  accom- 
plished in  a few  years.  I thought  of  what  these  vessels  were 
twenty  years  ago;  I realized  the  enormous  improvements  that 
have  been  made,  it  seemed  as  though  everything  had  been  done 
for  comfort  and  for  safety.  Hardly  had  we  left  the  harbor  when 
the  storms  of  heaven  swept  down  upon  us  and  the  waters  arose 
and  for  two  days  we  passed  through  fierce  gales  and  for  two  days 
afterward  through  thick  fogs,  and  my  thoughts  were  all  the  time 


8o 

of  the  man  on  the  bridge — the  captain.  One  mistake,  and  perhaps 
that  great  living,  throbbing  organism,  with  its  three  thousand 
souls,  would  go  crashing  down  to  sudden  wreck. 

So,  men  and  women,  the  blessing  we  enjoy  in  these  times. 
The  great  Ship  of  State,,  has  started  off ; we  know  that  any 
moment  the  winds  of  avarice  may  rush  down  upon  it;  we  know 
that  the  waters  of  Envy  may  arise — we  trust  our  captains,  but  we 
also  hold  our  breath  as  we  think  of  the  oceans  of  human  folly  and 
of  the  tempest  of  human  crime. 

We  are  told,  I have  often  been  told,  that  the  men  at  the 
head  of  this  movement  are  theorists,  men  who  do  not  reckon 
with  hard  facts,  but  it  seems  to  me  rather  that  they  are  men  who 
have  learned  how  to  judge  men.  All  of  them  can  say  they  have 
fought  many  a successful  battle,  brought  many  a prosperous  bark 
into  port,  but  because  such  tasks  are  difficult  they  wish  to  do 
this  work.  They  know  the  tempest  will  come,  they  know  any 
time  war  may  break  out,  and  that  is  why  they  resolve  to  stop 
war;  to  destroy  the  powers  of  darkness  arrayed  against  one 
another.  Gentlemen,  we  are  resolved  to  give  the  men  who  are 
doing  this  work  our  hearty  co-operation.  Because  these  ideas 
are  so  difficult  to  achieve,  therefore  we  strive  for  them,  knowing 
that  a cause  has  often  gained  more  through  honest  ridicule  and 
honest  opposition  than  through  empty  applause  and  too  easy  and 
insincere  adherence. 

Mr.  Carnegie  : 

Last  but  not  least  the  celebrated  astronomer,  a man  who  is 
perhaps  better  known  in  Great  Britain,,  in  every  town  in  Britain, 
than  any  other  man,  who  has  brought  to  light  the  mysteries  of 
astronomy  and  explained  them  to  more  people  than  any  other 
man  living.  I am  very  happy  to  say  that  Sir  Robert  Ball, 
Professor  of  Astronomy  at  Cambridge  University,  will  now  con- 
sume ten  minutes  of  your  time. 

The  Evolution  of  Warfare 

Sir  Robert  Ball 

I gladly  avail  myself  of  the  permission  to  say  a few  words  on 
this  occasion.  I do  so  with  the  object  of  tracing  the  bearings  of 
the  doctrine  of  evolution  on  the  question  of  transcendent  impor- 
tance which  has  brought  us  together. 


8i 


The  immortal  doctrine  of  Darwin  has  much  to  tell  us,  not, 
perhaps,  on  the  doctrine  of  peace,  but  on  the  doctrine  of  war. 
I hope  you  will  not  be  shocked  at  what  I am  going  to  say.  If 
you  are  I cannot  help  it,  for  I am  determined  at  all  hazards  to 
say  what  I want  to  say.  It  would  be  an  affront  to  this  audience 
not  to  speak  from  this  platform  the  exact  truth  so  far  as  I have 
been  able  to  learn  it.  I am  encouraged  by  the  reflection  that  the 
moral  I shall  draw  will  not  be  different  from  that  of  the  other 
speakers  who  have  addressed  you  on  this  memorable  occasion  to 
discuss  the  sublime  theme  before  us. 

The  teachings  of  history  have  occasionally  been  mentioned 
by  other  speakers ; but  the  history  to  which  I now  invite  your 
attention  is  not  the  flutter  of  a few  paltry  centuries,  nor  even  of 
a few  score  of  centuries,  like  the  period  during  which  man  has 
strutted  his  little  hour  on  this  planet. 

Some  of  us  can  trace  our  ancestry  back  a few  generations 
and  there  are  those  can  trace  an  ancestry  back  for  many  genera- 
tions. But  after  all,  how  short,  as  compared  with  geological  time, 
is  the  vista  thus  opened  up. 

The  bluest  blood  among  us  has  not  the  slightest  idea  of  what 
his  ancestors  were  like  one  hundred  generations  back : let  us  say 
in  1000  B.  C.  But  what  an  insignificant  trifle  is  3,000  years  in 
comparison  with  the  immemorial  ages  which  have  been  required 
for  the  evolution  of  the  human  species.  I want  you  to  think  of 
that  critical  period  of  earth  history,  I know  not  how  many  hun- 
dreds of  thousands  of  years  ago,  when  a being  capable  of  reason 
was  evolved  from  the  lower  forms  of  life. 

From  this  point  when  man  first  began  to  exist,  our  retro- 
spect of  ancestry  extends  through  myriads  of  generations.  Not 
to  be  too  vague,  let  us  concentrate  our  attention  on  one  particular 
date,  I cannot  tell  you  the  exact  date,  but  we  can  define  it  suf- 
ficiently for  our  present  purpose.  It  is  a date  of  much  interest 
to  us  in  connection  with  the  recent  celebrations  in  which  so  many 
of  us  had  the  honor  of  participating.  The  date  I refer  to  is  that 
when  that  truly  majestic  animal  the  Diplocodus  Carnegii  adorned 
the  plains  of  Wyoming  with  his  dignified  presence. 

Every  one  of  us  had,  we  must  have  had,  a direct  lineal 
ancestor  living  in  those  days  many  millions  of  years  ago,  when 
that  monster  reptile  swam  in  the  rivers,  or  wallowed  in  the 

6 


8 2 


swamps.  I am  not  intending  to  suggest  that  the  Diplocodus 
Carnegii  was  one  of  our  forefathers.  I wish  I could  think  that 
the  ancestor  we  had  at  that  time  was  anything  like  so  respectable 
as  the  Diplocodus.  The  rudimentary  man  was  some  small  and 
miserable  creature  which  the  Diplocodus  Carnegii  would  not 
have  deigned  to  notice,  nevertheless  we  should  like  to  see  his 
photograph. 

The  period  of  the  vast  reptiles,  though  ancient  beyond  all 
human  standards,  was  still  quite  recent  in  comparison  with  the 
earlier  stretches  of  time  during  which  the  evolution  was  pro- 
ceeding. Back  again  through  hundreds  and  thousands  and  mil- 
lions of  generations  our  retrospect  must  be  carried  through 
organisms  ever  simpler  and  simpler  in  structure  until  at  last  the 
dawn  of  life  commenced,  at  some  period  so  remote  that  Haeckel 
and  Gadow  estimate  that  not  less  than  five  million  generations 
of  living  forms  have  culminated  in  the  man  of  the  present  hour. 

Think  of  it,  you  and  I and  even  the  Chairman  have  descended 
through  a prodigious  ancestry  of  some  five  million  generations. 
You  know  something  of  two  or  three  or  four  or  perhaps  a few 
more.  But  even  he  whose  ancestral  mansion  is  lined  with  pic- 
tures of  his  forebears  knows  of  his  ancestry  less  than  the 
fifty-thousandth  part.  The  pictures  of  the  rest  he  has  not  got. 
Even  the  arboreal  members  he  would  perhaps  not  care  to  have  on 
his  walls. 

You,  perhaps,  who  pride  yourselves  on  long  series  of  ances- 
tors, will  please  observe  that  your  knowledge  of  your  ancestry  is 
so  infinitesimal  that  you  are  little  better  than  the  rest  of  us. 

Fortunately  for  our  present  purpose  we  are  not  totally  igno- 
rant of  our  five  million  ancestors.  We  do  know  quite  enough  to 
teach  us  the  merits  of  peace. 

Civilized  warfare  would  mean  that  the  rich  in  body  or  mind 
or  in  moral  nature  must  not  be  cured,  they  must  be  destroyed; 
the  weaker  races  according  to  natural  warfare  must  not  only  be 
conquered,  they  must  be  annihilated.  We  shudder  at  natural 
warfare,  we  will  have  none  of  it,  we  will  not  even  listen  to  it. 

The  warfare  of  civilized  man  is  conducted  according  to  the 
principles  of  chivalry.  The  non-combatants  are  not  to  be 
slaughtered.  Their  weakness  is  their  protection.  Civilized  man 
for  his  warfare  picks  out  all  his  strongest  and  best  men,  exposes 
them  to  all  the  risks  of  conflict  while  the  weaker  man  is  pro- 


83 

tected.  Thus  the  race  is  not  improved,  it  is  deteriorated  by 
warfare  as  conducted  by  civilized  man.  The  conclusion,  now, 
is  obvious.  By  the  natural  warfare  the  human  race  has  been 
created.  The  chivalrous  warfare  is  conducted  on  principles  quite 
wrong  from  the  doctrine  of  the  survival  of  the  fittest.  If,  there- 
fore, civilized  man  now  conducts  war  it  is  against  nature.  The 
human  race  must  pay  the  penalty.  The  moral  law  forbids  us  to 
purchase  future  improvements  of  the  human  race  at  the  appalling 
price  demanded  by  natural  warfare. 

With  no  less  force  does  the  polity  of  nations  demand  that 
chivalrous  war  must  cease,  as  by  its  means  the  human  race  will 
infallibly  deteriorate. 

Do  you,  my  friends,  suppose  that  all  your  five  million  ances- 
tors were  estimable  and  worthy  men  of  peace,  or  rather  shall  we 
say  creatures  of  peace,  diffusing  nothing  but  beneficent  love  and 
kindness  all  around  them,  creatures  who  after  a long  life  devoted 
to  the  pursuit  of  every  virtue,  at  last  closed  their  eyes  in  their 
beds  amid  the  affectionate  sobs  of  a family  circle? 

Shall  I tell  you  the  truth  about  your  ancestors  or  mine?  It 
is  just  this:  out  of  every  thousand  of  them,  nine  hundred  and 
ninety-nine  passed  their  lives  in  trying  to  kill  other  creatures  or 
trying  to  avoid  being  killed  themselves.  Battle  and  murder, 
treachery  and  assassination,  sudden  and  often  cruel  death  cut 
short  their  lives.  The  close  of  their  careers  was  anything  but 
the  beautiful  scene  I endeavored  to  indicate.  They  did  not  die 
peaceably  in  their  beds.  I cannot  indeed  say  they  died  in  their 
boots.  They  did  not  wear  boots.  If  they  had  done  so,  they  would 
have  wanted  two  pairs  at  the  same  time.  Such  was,  I have  no 
doubt,  the  fate  of  nine  hundred  and  ninety-nine  out  of  every 
thousand  of  my  ancestors.  I have  the  profoundest  respect  and 
admiration  for  them  all,  for  all,  that  is  to  say,  except  the  odd  one 
of  the  thousand,  who  was  evidently  some  poor,  mean-spirited 
creature. 

War  by  day  and  war  by  night  has  been  incessant  for  all 
those  millions  of  generations.  What  has  been  the  result  of  that 
war?  The  result  has  been  the  survival  of  the  fittest,  the  creation 
of  man,  rational  man  himself.  No  one  in  this  room  would  have 


84 

been  as  intelligent  as  a jelly-fish  if  it  had  not  been  for  that  war- 
fare, incessantly  waged  for  hundreds  of  millions  of  years. 

War,  stern,  ruthless  war,  war  where  no  quarter  is  given. 
War  where  the  weak  are  exterminated,  hideously  cruel  war.  War 
with  no  mitigating  spark  of  chivalry — in  a word,  natural  war, 
which  has  been  essential  to  the  evolution  from  which  man  has 
ascended. 

Does  anyone  think  that  evolution  could  have  done  what  it 
has  done  without  that  awful  natural  warfare  ? Impossible. 
Remember  Tennyson,  who  says  : 

“Tho’  Nature  red  with  tooth  and  claw, 

With  ravine,  shriek’d  against  his  creed.” 

It  is  the  natural  warfare  which  has  raised  the  species,  but 
the  moral  sense  of  civilized  man  will  not  now  tolerate  the  natural 
warfare. 

The  warfare  of  civilized  man  is  conducted  according  to  the 
principles  of  chivalry.  The  non-combatants  are  not  to  be 
slaughtered.  Their  weakness  is  their  protection.  Civilized  man 
for  his  warfare  picks  out  all  his  strongest  and  best  men,  exposes 
them  to  all  the  risks  of  conflict,  while  the  weaker  man  is 
protected.  Thus  the  race  is  not  improved,  it  is  deteriorated  by 
warfare  as  conducted  by  civilized  man.  The  conclusion,  now,  is 
obvious.  By  the  natural  warfare  the  human  race  has  been 
created.  The  chivalrous  warfare  is  conducted  on  principles  quite 
wrong  from  the  doctrine  of  the  survival  of  the  fittest.  If,  there- 
fore, civilized  man  now  conducts  war  it  is  against  nature. 
The  human  race  must  pay  the  penalty.  The  moral  law  forbids 
us  to  purchase  future  improvement  of  the  human  race  at  the 
appalling  price  demanded  by  natural  warfare. 

With  no  less  force  does  the  polity  of  nations  demand  that 
chivalrous  war  must  cease,  as  by  its  means  the  human  race  will 
infallibly  deteriorate. 

(At  this  point  cries  of  “Bryan”  were  heard  from  all  parts 
of  the  hall.) 

Mr.  Carnegie  : 

It  is  not  necessary  for  me  to  introduce  Mr.  Bryan  to  an 
American  audience.  He  will  say  a few  words  to  you. 


85 

Mr.  Bryan  : 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  I am  on  the 
program  for  Wednesday  afternoon,  and  I shall  then  be  able  to 
say  what  I desire  to  say  to  you,  therefore  I want  you  to  be 
permitted  to  listen  to  some  of  these  distinguished  visitors  who 
have  come  to  us  from  abroad,  who  have  given  us  the  views  enter- 
tained in  their  countries.  All  I want  to  say  to-night  before  yield- 
ing the  floor  to  the  gentleman  for  whom  you  have  shown  such 
partiality,  and  who  is  prepared  to  speak  to  you  again,  is  this,  that 
it  seems  we  are  drawing  arguments  in  favor  of  peace  from 
every  source.  We  have  drawn  some  to-night  from  sources  that 
I had  not  expected.  I had  hoped  we  should  be  able  to  bring 
about  peace  by  resting  entirely  upon  the  theory  that  Man  is  made 
in  the  image  of  his  Creator,  but  I am  glad  to  have  peace  brought 
to  us  even  from  the  theory  of  man  made  in  the  image  of  the  ape. 
(Applause.) 

Mr.  Carnegie  : 

The  Secretary  will  read  to  you  a few  telegrams  which  he 
has  received  from  highly  important  personages,  including  some 
of  the  kings  of  Europe. 

Mr.  Ely  : 

I am  afraid  it  would  overtax  your  patience  if  you  were 
asked  to  listen  to  all  these  messages.  Perhaps  I may  tell  you 
the  sources  from  which  some  of  them  come  and  you  may  hear 
them  on  some  other  occasion.  We  heard  this  evening,  a moment 
or  two  ago,  from  one  representative  of  Holland  in  the  person  of 
“Maarten  Maartens.,,  We  have  another  message  from  Holland, 
the  Minister  of  Foreign  Affairs  at  the  Hague  giving  us  his 
good  wishes.  From  Switzerland  we  have  two  messages, — one 
from  the  President  of  the  Swiss  Federation  (applause)  and 
the  other  from  the  head  of  the  Permanent  International  Peace 
Bureau  at  Berne.  We  have  from  Norway  two  messages ; one 
from  the  King  of  Norway  and  one  from  the  Nobel 
Committee  of  the  Norwegian  Parliament.  We  have  from 
Sweden  a very  cordial  letter  from  the  International  Parlia- 
mentary Group  in  the  National  Legislature  of  Sweden.  We 
have  a very  kind  message  from  the  King  of  Italy,  Victor 


86 

Emmanuel.  One  of  the  leaders  of  the  Peace  movement  in 
Europe,  who  would  have  been  with  us  if  he  could,  is  Count 
Apponyi,  the  head  of  the  Liberal  party  in  Hungary,  and  he  has 
written  us  a letter.  President  Diaz,  who  is  evincing  a most 
earnest  interest  in  this  gathering,  has  been  so  kind  as  to  send  a 
special  message  to  be  presented  at  the  Banquet  on  Wednesday 
evening  by  the  Mexican  Ambassador,  who  is  also  his  special  repre- 
sentative at  the  Congress. 

There  are  a great  many  other  messages,  with  which  perhaps 
your  patience  ought  not  to  be  taxed. 

Mr.  Carnegie  : 

The  Secretary  shows  his  usual  good  sense;  so,  ladies  and 
gentlemen,  we  will  bid  you  one  and  all  good  night. 


Miss  Mary  E.  Woolley 
Mrs.  Hannah  J Bailey 


Mrs.  May  Wright  Sewall 
Miss  Jane  Addams 
Mrs.  Lucia  Ames  Mead 


From  Stereograph,  Copyright  1907, 
by  Underwood  & Underwood,  New  York. 

Mrs.  Ellen  M.  Henrotin 
Senorita  Carolina  Huidobro 


87 


FOURTH  SESSION 

THE  RELATION  OF  WOMEN  TO  THE 
PEACE  MOVEMENT 
Carnegie  Hall 

Tuesday  Morning,  April  Sixteenth,  at  10.30 
MRS.  ANNA  GARUN  SPENCER  Presiding 

Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe,  Mrs.  May  Wright  Sew  all, 
Guests  of  Honor. 

Mrs.  Spencer: 

The  Women’s  Session  of  the  Peace  Congress  will  now  open, 
with  the  singing  of  the  hymn  of  invocation,  in  which  I hope  the 
audience,  as  well  as  the  chorus,  will  join. 

THY  KINGDOM  COME. 

William  Gaskell.  George  Frederick  Handel 

O God,  the  darkness  roll  away, 

Which  clouds  the  human  soul, 

And  let  the  bright,  the  perfect  day 
Speed  onward  to  its  goal. 

Let  every  hateful  passion  die 
Which  makes  of  brethren  foes; 

And  war  no  longer  raise  its  cry, 

To  mar  the  world’s  repose. 

Let  faith  and  hope  and  charity 
Go  forth  through  all  the  earth ; 

And  man,  in  heavenly  bearing,  be 
True  to  his  heavenly  birth. 


Mrs.  Spencer: 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : This  meeting  is  to  consider  how 
the  great  basic  institutions  of  society,  of  which  women  are  a 
vital  part,  stand  related  to  the  Peace  Movement.  We  need  to 


88 


begin  all  our  interpretation  of  the  present  with  some  accurate 
knowledge  of  the  past, — and  our  first  speaker  will  give  us  a 
brief  outline  of  the  history  of  the  Peace  Movement.  Lucia 
Ames  Mead,  of  Boston,  the  Chairman  of  the  Peace  Committees 
of  the  National  Council  of  Women  and  National  American 
Women  Suffrage  Association,  and  author  of  the  “Peace  Primer,” 
and  other  important  literature  of  the  subject,  will  now  address 
you. 


History  of  the  Peace  Movement 

Mrs.  Lucia  Ames  Mead. 

Behold,  I bring  you  good  tidings  of  great  joy  which  shall  be 
to  all  people  who  can  discern  the  meaning  of  the  history  that  is 
now  making.  It  is  that,  just  as  the  eighteenth  century  achieved 
peace  and  justice  between  thirteen  states  and  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury extended  peace  and  justice  between  forty-five  states,  the 
twentieth  century  is  to  secure  peace  with  justice  between  all  the 
forty-six  nations  of  the  globe.  The  same  principles  of  organiza- 
tion which  created  a United  States  are  to  create  a United  World. 
Internal  violence  and  disorder  may  endure  much  longer,  but 
duelling  between  nations  is  to  cease.  Democracy  and  modern 
commerce  and  a growing  sense  of  justice  have  decreed  that  sub- 
marines and  dynamite  shall  not  usurp  the  place  of  judge  and 
jury.  The  movement  for  international  peace  is  not  beginning, 
but  is  now  approaching  its  consummation. 

Silent  forces  have  been  at  work  ever  since  the  great  Dutch 
statesman,  Hugo  Grotius,  published  his  “Rights  of  War  and 
Peace,”  whilst  Bradford  and  Carver  were  building  their  log 
houses  in  little  Plymouth.  Of  this  book,  Andrew  D.  White  has 
said  “of  all  works  not  claiming  to  be  inspired,  it  has  proved  the 
greatest  blessing  to  humanity.”  Time  forbids  to  speak  of  brave 
George  Fox,  who  founded  the  society  of  Friends, — the  oldest 
peace  society  in  the  world ; — of  his  brilliant  successor,  William 
Penn,  wJho  published  a remarkable  “plan  for  the  Permanent  Peace 
of  Europe” ; of  Immanuel  Kant,  a century  later,  who  with  philo- 
sophic wisdom  proclaimed  that  the  world  could  not  have  peace 
until  it  was  organized,  and  that  it  could  not  be  safely  federated 
until  it  had  representative  government.  But  in  this  brief  sum- 
mary, I must  confine  myself  to  a fraction  of  what  has  happened 


8g 

since  1815,  when  David  Low  Dodge  founded  the  first  peace 
society  in  the  world.  He  was  a noble  New  York  merchant 
whose  posterity  unto  the  third  generation  have  honored  this  city 
by  their  disinterested  service.  Since  that  year  nearly  five  hun- 
dred peace  societies  and  auxiliary  branches  have  been  established 
in  the  world,  of  which  the  American  Peace  Society  with  head- 
quarters in  Boston  is  the  oldest  in  the  country,  and  the  New  York 
Peace  Society  is  one  of  the  youngest  and  most  vigorous.  The 
International  Peace  Bureau  is  at  Berne,  Switzerland. 

During  the  first  half  of  the  century  Noah  Worcester,  Wil- 
liam Ellery  Channing,  William  Ladd,  Elihu  Burritt  and  Charles 
Sumner,  and  other  noble  citizens  of  Massachusetts  worked  out 
the  scheme  for  a Permanent  International  Tribunal  which  came 
to  be  known  in  Europe  as  “the  American  Way.”  They,  like  so 
many  pioneers,  died  ere  they  saw  the  realization  of  their  hopes. 
But  they  blazed  the  path  which  statesmen  and  captains  of  indus- 
try are  entering  to-day. 

Among  the  silent  forces  which  have  been  promoting  the 
rational  settlement  of  international  difficulties  have  been  those 
missionaries  of  the  Most  High — democracy,  steam  and  electricity. 
Within  a hundred  years  the  world  has  shrunk  so  small  that  yes- 
terday’s doings  on  five  continents  are  reported  every  morning  at 
our  breakfast  table.  A century  ago  a war  in  Manchuria  would 
not  have  been  known  here  until  four  months  after  it  had  begun, 
and  would  in  no  way  have  affected  us.  To-day  commerce  has 
so  expanded  that  every  merchant  must  consider  the  whole  world 
in  estimating  his  supply  and  the  demand.  Investors  have  become 
so  sensitive  that  the  hysteria  in  this  country  twelve  years  ago 
over  the  possibility  of  war  with  England  about  a boundary  line 
in  Venezuela  cost  us  $100,000,000  in  foreign  investments. 

Slowly  we  are  learning  that,  “in  the  gain  or  loss  of  one  race 
all  the  rest  have  equal  claim,”  that  as  a matter  of  business  we 
can  not  allow  prospective  customers  to  be  beggared  by  belligerent 
neighbors  or  the  highways  of  commerce  to  be  blocked  by  the 
shameful  legalized  piracy  that  up  to  date  has  menaced  the  peace- 
ful merchantman  in  war  time.  Migration,  travel,  the  photograph 
and  school  book  have  modified  national  prejudice,  born  of  igno- 
rance and  isolation.  Such  a new  book  as  Bridgman’s  “World 
Organizations,”  emancipates  the  reader  from  the  narrow  outlook 
of  the  past  and  opens  up  a new  world  of  thought. 


go 

When  Kant  declared  representative  government  to  be  a 
necessary  prerequisite  for  an  organized  and  peaceful  world,  no 
nation  in  the  world  had  real  representation.  To-day  no  nation 
in  Christendom  is  without  some  degree  of  it.  Even  Russia  has 
its  Duma.  Outside  of  Christendom,  Japan  has  a representative 
Assembly;  within  six  months  Persia  has  gained  one,  and  China 
is  promised  one  within  twelve  years.  Thus,  for  the  first  time  in 
history,  world  organization  is  now  a possibility. 

The  first  step  towards  it  which  commanded  the  world’s  atten- 
tion was  the  Czar’s  manifesto  of  August,  1898.  This  resulted 
partly  from  alarm  over  the  frightful  increase  of  war  budgets 
without  any  increase  in  safety,  and  partly  from  the  profound 
impression  made  by  the  great  work  on  “The  Future  of  War”  by 
the  eminent  economist  and  imperal  councillor,  Jean  de  Bloch. 
This  demonstrated  that  under  modern  conditions  war  between 
equally  equipped  forces  was  futile  and  would  result  simply  in 
bankruptcy  if  fought  to  a finish,  with  victory  for  neither  side. 
The  Czar  declared  that  increase  of  armaments — the  supposed 
preventive  of  war — was  bringing  about  “the  very  cataclysm  it 
was  designed  to  avert.”  In  fact  a long  armed  peace  was  as 
great  a drain  as  a brief  war.  In  response  to  his  invitation  one 
hundred  delegates  from  the  twenty-six  nations  that  had  repre- 
sentatives at  St.  Petersburg  met  on  May  18,  1899,  “The  House 
in  the  Wood,”  at  The  Hague,  and  behind  locked  doors,  divided 
into  committees,  they  worked  steadily  for  three  months.  At  first 
pessimistic  and  skeptical,  they  became  inspired  with  hope  through 
the  influence  of  Lord  Pauncefote,  Baron  d’Estournelles  de  Con- 
stant, Andrew  D.  White,  our  minister  at  Berlin,  who  headed  the 
American  delegation,  and  a few  others,  men  of  faith  and  vision 
who  knew  their  subject  and  did  most  of  the  laborious  and  tactful 
work.  At  a critical  moment,  when  Germany’s  opposition  seemed 
about  to  frustrate  all  hope  of  co-operation,  Mr.  Holls,  an  Ameri- 
can, was  sent  by  Mr.  White  to  Berlin  to  see  Hohenlohe  and  Von 
Bulow.  They  declared  the  indifference  of  the  German  people  in 
the  problem  and  questioned  whether  the  American  people  cared 
much  about  it.  They  were  amazed  to  see  the  multitude  of  letters 
and  cablegrams  from  all  over  the  country  which  he  showed  as 
evidence  of  our  concern.  Among  them  was  a telegram  from 
thirty-one  Baptist  clergymen  in  Oregon,  each  one  of  whom  had 
paid  a dollar  to  send  it.  Another  was  a prayer,  written  by  a 


91 

bishop  of  Texas,  which  was  to  be  prayed  every  Sunday  in  every 
church  of  his  diocese.  These  simple  documents  had  weight. 
The  Germans  removed  their  difficulties  and  the  work  went  on  at 
The  Hague  to  its  brilliant  consummation. 

As  a result  of  the  Conference  of  1899,  though  the  limitation 
of  armaments  which  the  Czar  desired  was  postponed,  its  logical 
precedent,  a Permanent  International  Tribunal,  was  established, 
and  in  April,  1901,  the  doors  of  a fine  brick  mansion  at  The 
Hague,  owned  by  the  signatory  powers,  were  opened  for  the 
admission  of  any  cases  that  they  chose  to  bring  to  this  World 
Court.  A little  later  the  generous  gift  of  Mr.  Carnegie  of 
$1,500,000  for  a magnificent  building  and  law  library  for  it  gave 
the  Tribunal  additional  prestige.  Of  its  more  than  seventy  judges, 
from  which  five  are  to  be  chosen  for  each  case,  the  United  States 
has  appointed  four,  two  of  whom — Judge  Gray  and  Hon.  Oscar 
Straus — honor  this  Congress  by  their  participation  in  it. 

Since  the  Tribunal  was  opened  more  than  a dozen  nations 
have  carried  cases  there  and  forty-four  treaties  between  different 
nations — two  by  two — have  been  made  to  refer  cases  to  it.  Hol- 
land and  Denmark,  Chili  and  Argentina  have  agreed  to  arbitrate 
every  case  with  each  other,  showing  that  questions  of  honor  can 
be  arbitrated  between  nations  as  well  as  between  individuals. 
Norway  and  Sweden  in  their  recent  peaceful  separation  have 
agreed  to  refer  to  the  Hague  Court  any  difficulties  that  may  arise 
claimed  by  either  to  be  questions  of  honor. 

Mbreover,  the  Hague  Conference  provided  for  impartial 
investigation  before  declaring  war  issues  in  which  diplomacy  had 
failed.  When  the  attack  by  the  Russian  battleships  was  made 
upon  the  British  fishing  fleet  in  the  North  sea  in  1905,  and  all 
Great  Britain  seemed  inflamed  with  a wild  demand  for  vengeance, 
the  whole  controversy  was  quietly  transferred  to  an  impartial 
commission  sitting  in  Paris.  This  finally  decided  that  the  Rus- 
sians had  merely  blundered  and  asked  them  to  pay  $300,000  to 
the  widows  and  orphans ; which  they  gladly  did.  Thus  was  war 
prevented  between  Russia  and  Great  Britain.  Another  provision 
of  that  Conference  of  1899  was  for  mediation.  This  enabled 
President  Roosevelt  without  danger  of  being  criticised  for  inter- 
ference to  invite  Russia  and  Japan  to  end  at  Portsmouth  one  of 
the  most  terrible  wars  of  modern  times. 

The  International  Postal  Union  with  headquarters  at  Berne, 


92 

in  Switzerland ; the  new  International  Institute  of  Agriculture 
with  headquarters  in  Rome;  the  International  Law  Association, 
an  outcome  of  the  American  Peace  Society;  the  New  Interna- 
tional Law  Quarterly — an  outcome  of  Mr.  Smiley’s  Arbitration 
Conferences  at  Mohonk — are  only  a few  of  the  more  important 
of  the  hundred  international  agencies  which  are  promoting  such 
co-operation  as  the  world  our  fathers  knew  could  never  have 
attained.  Especially  we  note  the  growith  of  the  Interparlia- 
mentary Union,  founded  by  Hon.  William  Cremer,  M.  P.,  one  of 
the  winners  of  the  Nobel  prize.  At  its  fourteenth  session,  held 
in  London  last  summer,  this  august  body,  composed  of  about 
2,500  members  of  the  nations’  congresses,  devoted  their  whole 
time  to  marking  out  their  recommendations  for  the  subjects  to 
be  considered  at  the  second  Hague  Conference,  which  convenes 
next  June.  It  is  to  support  their  recommendations  that  this  first 
National  American  Congress  has  been  called.  Since  1899,  two 
new  agencies  for  peace  are  slowly  being  recognized  as  of  mighty 
potency — neutralization  of  weak  peoples  like  the  Filipinos,  and 
the  boycott  employed  upon  a recalcitrant  nation.  Of  these  there 
is  no  time  to  speak. 

The  second  Hague  Conference  which  this  time  includes,  not 
merely  twenty-six  nations,  but  all  of  the  forty-six  nations  of  the 
globe,  offers  the  greatest  opportunity  in  human  history  to  lessen 
the  world’s  poverty  and  misery.  Let  every  teacher  tell  her 
pupils  of  it.  Let  every  woman  who  believes  in  prayer,  pray  for 
it.  Let  every  mother,  wife  and  daughter  speak  words  of  wisdom 
about  it  in  their  households.  Let  not  the  women  of  America  be 
childish  and  inert  when  such  stupendous  issues  hang  in  the  bal- 
ance. 

Mrs.  Spencer: 

One  of  our  leading  sociologists  says:  “In  the  individual, 
the  social  unit,  reside  the  seeds  of  health  or  disease  in  the  social 
organism ; and  the  home,  • the  family,  is  the  agency  by  which 
the  individual  is  socialized.”  We  begin  our  consideration  of 
women’s  present  relation  to  the  Peace  Movement  with  a discus- 
sion of  the  Home  versus  War.  I have  great  pleasure  in  present- 
ing to  you,  as  the  speaker  for  that  subject,  one  who  peculiarly 
represents  all  that  we  mean  when  we  speak  the  words  “complete 
womanhood,”  Mrs.  Ellen  M.  Henrotin,  formerly  President  of  the 
General  Federation  of  Women’s  Clubs,  and  now  the  National 
President  of  the  Women’s  Trade  Union  League. 


93 

The  Home  and  the  Economic  Waste  of  War 

Mrs.  Ellen  M.  Henrotin. 

When  in  the  past  a question  of  international  or  national 
adjustment  arose  it  was  vain  to  ask  what  influence  pro  or  con 
woman  exerted  over  the  decision;  for  in  truth,  her  voice  was 
unheard — her  non-success  as  a promoter  of  peace  among  nations 
is  the  best  answer  to  the  oft-repeated  argument  against  extend- 
ing her  civil  and  political  influence  “that  it  is  woman’s  indirect 
influence  which  counts  in  political  and  civil  matters.”  When  a 
war  issue  is  raised  the  family  or  economic  interests  of  women  or 
children  are,  and  have  always  been,  completely  ignored;  though 
this  disregard  of  home  interests  is  usually  disguised  to  both  men 
and  women,  by  an  appeal  to  love  of  country,  or  to  express  it  in 
the  war  language,  “For  home  and  native  land.”  If  by  chance 
women  do  not  respond  immediately  to  so  impersonal  an  issue, 
when  it  affects  such  precious  interests,  they  are  cited  as  poor 
creatures  not  worthy  of  their  great  opportunities.  Woman  has 
in  the  past  accepted  this  role  of  passivity,  has  cherished  it,  even 
made  a fetich  of  it;  she  has  concurred  with  man  in  the  dictum 
“Might  makes  right.”  Thus  in  those  countries  where  the  military 
form  of  government  prevails  it  goes  without  saying,  that  the 
part  which  woman,  by  her  labor,  contributes  to  the  fund  which 
makes  for  civilization,  is  held  in  light  esteem,  though  so  essential 
in  reality,  and  that  even  her  “indirect  influence”  is  not  acknowl- 
edged. 

Woman  conceives  of  the  ideal  man  as  expressing  towards  his 
country  physical  energy  and  forceful  high  spirits;  while  man 
conceives  of  woman  towards  the  same  demand  as  expressing 
passive  endurance — as  these  two  ideals  permeate  society  the  influ- 
ence on  the  home  is  so  great  that  in  political  matters  woman  has 
become  practically  non-expressive ; false  conceptions  of  patriot- 
ism which  pervade  all  nations  have  done  their  part  towards  ren- 
dering her  voiceless,  while  the  splendid  trappings  of  war,  the 
rewards  meted  out  to  its  heroes,  in  which  their  women  share, 
have  dazzled  the  eyes  and  excited  the  imagination  so  that  it  is  not 
surprising  that  women,  as  a group,  have  accepted  the  role  of 
abettor  and  aider,  in  so  far  as  a non-combatant  possibly  could  do. 

During  the  Civil  War  the  women  on  both  sides,  instead  of 
restraining,  urged  on  the  men;  in  the  Austrian-Prussian  and 


94 

Franco-Prussian  wars,  the  same  phenomenon  was  observed — 
as  it  was  also  in  the  South  African  and  Russian- Japanese  wars — 
perhaps  slightly  less  in  the  Spanish- American  war.  When  all  the 
considerations  are  taken  into  account  which  should  operate  to 
influence  women  in  favor  of  peace  and  arbitration,  the  attitude 
towards  war  which  she  has  taken  in  the  past  is  difficult  to  com- 
prehend, for  death  or  inevitable  suffering  come  to  those  she  calls 
her  own  as  its  result,  and  even  her  own  share  is  hard  to  bear, 
meaning,  if  she  is  the  mother  of  a family,  the  uncertainty  of  her 
economic  position,  being  deprived  by  absence  or  death  of  the  one 
who  should  share  the  support  and  care  of  the  children.  The  con- 
tending armies  often  sweep  away  her  home,  which  involves  the 
disintegration  of  its  members ; or  as  in  Cuba  or  South  Africa  as 
an  inmate  of  a reconcentrado  camp,  she  and  her  little  ones  are 
exposed  to  privation,  disease  and  death.  The  suffering  of  the 
women  and  children  of  Germany,  France  and  the  Netherlands, 
even  since  the  Reformation,  are  almost  beyond  belief ; thus  her 
acquiescence  is  one  of  the  most  astounding  results  of  the  potency 
of  the  group  opinion  and  its  expression. 

It  is  the  more  noticeable  as  woman  has  had  the  practical 
experience  of  her  own  rise  in  the  social  and  industrial  world,  of 
her  own  progress  from  slavery  and  wardship  to  a condition  of 
comparative  freedom  and  the  recognition  which  is  slowly  but 
surely  being  awarded  her  in  the  home  and  in  society,  all  of  which 
has  been  won  by  non-resistence.  It  is  the  only  cause  that  has 
progressed  without  the  shedding  of  blood ; all  other  great  reforms 
have  had  their  battles,  as  nationality,  religion  and  politics. 
Human  victims  have  been  offered  upon  all  their  altars,  but 
woman’s  progress  has  been  won  by  almost  silent  insistence  on 
the  value  of  the  peaceful  arts  and  the  principles  of  conciliation, 
until  to-day  the  entire  industrial  world  is  busy  supplying  her 
demands. 

There  are  certain  tendencies  in  present-day  society  that 
evince  the  fact  that  all  nations  are  being  aroused  to  a new  con- 
ception of  their  responsibility  towards  war’s  waste,  and  among 
women  it  is  natural,  as  it  affects  the  home,  and  they  chiefly  are 
interested,  though  men  and  women  alike  are  convinced  that  war 
is  now  too  costly  a game  for  nations  to  play.  The  self-support- 
ing woman  is  more  impressed  by  this  thought,  for  she  meets  the 
realities  of  life  and  thus  becomes  a judge  of  relative  values ; being 


95 

obliged  to  take  her  part  in  the  competitive  struggle  for  her  dally 
bread,  she  learns  the  value  of  life  and  work;  thus  she  under- 
stands economic  waste.  When  the  wage-earning  woman  marries 
and  becomes  a mother,  she  realizes  the  economic  importance  of 
the  life  of  the  husband  and  father, — as  she  knows  actual  condi- 
tions she  is  increasingly  unwilling  to  give  up  that  life  to  the 
country;  she  desires  to  retain  it  for  the  benefit  of  the  family.  If 
the  actual  facts  could  be  ascertained  it  would  be  found  that  a 
much  smaller  percentage  of  married  men  enlisted,  or  offered  to 
enlist,  in  the  late  Spanish- American  War  than  did  in  the  Civil 
War — largely  due  to  the  fact  of  the  present  changed  point  of 
view  of  women.  As  opportunities  to  secure  a competency  decrease 
from  stress  of  population  or  otherwise,  this  tendency  will 
increase.  Perhaps  one  of  the  most  convincing  proofs  of  the 
subtle  working  of  this  influence  was  given  in  England  when,  after 
the  South  African  War,  the  advisability  of  establishing  the  con- 
scription was  discussed.  It  was  evident  at  once  that  the  English 
people  would  no  longer  tolerate  such  a measure. 

The  education  of  children  in  this  country  has  been  free  from 
the  influence  of  military  training ; this  is  notably  true  of  the  spirit 
of  the  public  school  teachings.  After  each  war  there  inevitably 
arises  a hysterical  demand  for  mor^  military  training  in  public 
and  private  schools,  but  the  practical,  common  sense  of  an  indus- 
trial democracy  soon  asserts  itself  and  the  children  are,  in  most 
instances,  left  to  follow  the  ways  of  peace — at  least  until  the  boys 
reach  the  football  age. 

Woman  is  every  day  learning  new  methods  of  expressing 
herself — either  as  a member  of  a group  or  as  an  individual;  one 
of  the  first  efforts  of  her  expression  of  what  is  to  her  a new-found 
truth,  is  found  in  the  falling  birth-rate  among  those  nations  which 
make  large  demands  on  the  family  to  maintain  standing  armies 
or  great  armaments.  Among  those  nations,  the  women  best 
fitted  to  bear  and  care  for  children  refuse  to  bear  sons  at  the  call 
of  what  has  become  for  them  an  absolute  duty.  The  claim  of 
the  army  on  family  life  has  seriously  affected  the  birth-rate  in 
France,  where  the  women  are  notably  intelligent  and  far-sighted 
observers  of  economic  conditions.  The  Government  has  offered 
prizes  for  large  families,  but  the  French  women,  with  the  Napole- 
onic wars  of  the  past  and  the  large  standing  army  of  to-day,  will 
not  be  tempted  by  such  a bribe.  Were  the  United  States  to 


g6 

undertake  frequent  wars  on  “punitive  expeditions,”  the  same 
thing  would  take  place  in  this  country,  for  women  are  now 
resolved  to  have  a voice  in  national  discussions  which  so  vitally 
touch  the  family  life.  It  is  a well-recognized  fact,  in  all  coun- 
tries, that  it  is  increasingly  difficult  to  secure  by  enlistment  men 
who  are  equal  to  the  army  requirements.  In  countries  where 
there  is  no  conscription,  army  men  will  acknowledge  this  diffi- 
culty, which  undoubtedly  is  to  be  accounted  for  by  the  yet 
unrecognized,  but  potent,  change  in  the  home  point  of  view 
towards  army  life  and  the  soldier’s  profession. 

This  sounds  in  the  reading  very  materialistic,  but  it  is  said 
“that  civilization  is  an  economic  fact.”  Certain  changes  which 
industrial  democracy  operates  to  bring  about  in  the  spiritual 
realm  are  startling  in  their  expression — it  may  well  be  that  it  will 
read  new  meanings  into  War  and  Peace. 

If  War’s  economic  waste  is  great,  what  shall  be  said  of  its 
spiritual  waste?  The  writer  once  heard  the  late  General  Walker 
say  that  the  materialism  and  commercialism  which  prevail  among 
men  to  so  great  an  extent  in  the  United  States  were,  in  his  opin- 
ion, the  result  of  the  loss  to  the  country,  both  in  the  N'orth  and 
the  South,  of  the  “men  of  the  ideal”  in  our  Civil  War.  Those 
who  for  love  of  home  or  for  freedom’s  sake  went  to  the  front 
were  of  the  quality  of  which  poets,  artists,  priests  and  authors 
are  made — perhaps  the  Churches  have  felt  their  loss  more  than 
any  other  agency  which  makes  for  righteousness.  It  may  be 
that  the  lack  of  business  ideality,  the  difficulty  of  making  business 
dramatic  as  it  were,  can  also  be  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that 
the  excessive  demands  made  on  the  lives  of  the  men  of  the  ideal, 
those  who  were  the  most  capable  of  putting  the  human  side  into 
business  ventures,  are  gone,  leaving  the  ultra  practical  man  of 
business  in  the  ascendancy. 

The  apparent  supremacy  of  American  women  on  the  cul- 
tured side  of  life  over  the  men  may  also  be  explained,  as  they, 
as  a group,  were  not  at  that  time  subjected  to  the  same  spiritual 
waste. 

The  world  is  always  in  need  of  the  love  and  gracious  influ- 
ence of  the  daughters  of  men.  In  a civilization  which  boasts  that 
woman’s  influence  is  all  powerful,  she  cannot  raise  her  voice  in 
the  Councils  of  the  Nations  to  urge  moderation,  conciliation;  she 
cannot  by  her  vote  turn  down  war  as  “useless  argument,”  but 


97 

she  can  emphasize  the  blessing  of  peace  in  the  home,  in  society, 
by  expressing  her  firm  conviction  that  civilization  is  founded  on 
Peace  on  Earth,  Good-will  toward  men — and  this  message  she 
may  carry  into  the  marts  of  trade — into  the  social  world — into 
the  great  Congress  of  Nations. 

Mrs.  Spencer: 

It  is  fitting,  after  these  noble  words,  that  we  should  have 
noble  music  from  the  friends  who  have  so  kindly  come  to  make 
more  attractive  our  program — the  members  of  the  St.  Cecelia 
Society  and  the  Wednesday  Morning  Singing  Club,  under  the 
direction  of  Mr.  Victor  Harris. 

(Music.  “How  lovely  are  the  messengers  that  preach  us  the 
gospel  of  Peace!”) 

Mrs.  Spencer: 

The  next  speaker  represents  what  Emerson  said  was 
“woman’s  organic  office  in  the  world,”! — education.  The  school 
has  gone  out  from  the  home  and  has  become  a separate  institu- 
tion. As  it  has  left  the  home  it  has  initiated  great  educational 
interests  on  behalf  of  women,  and  now  we  have  women’s  colleges 
and  presidents  of  women’s  colleges,  and  social  responsibilities 
placed  heavily  upon  educated  women. 

I take  great  pleasure  in  introducing  to  you  Miss  Mary  E. 
Woolley,  President  of  Mount  Holyoke  College  for  women. 

The  Relation  of  Educated  Women  to  the  Peace 

Movement 

President  Mary  E.  Woolley. 

The  impressiveness  of  a gathering  like  this  Peace  Congress 
must  be  felt  by  all.  It  is  an  inspiration  to  have  a part  in  a 
movement  which  is  commanding  the  attention  of  the  civilized 
world,  to  feel  the  impetus  which  comes  from  great  assemblies, 
from  wise  words  and  eloquent  appeals,  from  the  sense  of  a com- 
mon interest  which  knows  no  limitation  of  race  or  nation.  Such 
occasions  are  significant  in  the  progress,  not  only  of  the  move- 
ment represented,  but  of  civilization  itself,  for  inspiration  is  the 
great  motive  power  of  achievement. 


g8 

Yet  it  is  equally  true  that  such  a gathering  as  New  York 
has  seen  this  week  would  fail  of  the  highest  results  were  it  not 
followed  by  continued  effort.  It  is  with  this  thought  in  mind 
that  I welcome  the  opportunity  to  speak  to  an  audience  of  women, 
for  upon  you  rests  the  real  burden  of  this  responsibility.  The 
changes  have  been  rung  upon  the  “new  woman”;  she  has  been 
extolled  and  ridiculed,  explained  and  explained  away,  but  the 
fact  remains  that  she  does  exist,  that  the  type  of  womanhood 
to-day  is  essentially  different  from  that  of  any  other  age.  The 
intellectual  type  is  not  new;  the  woman  of  force,  the  r*uler,  the 
politician,  the  warrior,  the  intriguer — the  Elizabeths,  the  Madame 
de  Maintenons,  the  Boadiceas,  the  Catherine  de  Medicis — have 
been  known  in  other  ages.  Nor  is  the  emotional  type  a novelty 
either  in  history  or  fiction.  The  achievement,  the  distinction  of 
the  representative  womanhood  of  to-day,  is  that  it  unites  the  intel- 
lectual and  the  emotional  for  some  larger  social  end  than  the 
world  has  ever  known  before.  Her  opportunity  extends  from 
neighborhood  nursing  to  world  organization  in  the  cause  of 
peace.  The  woman  of  force  now  is  the  woman  of  the  multitude, 
the  woman  in  industry,  in  the  home,  in  society.  Education  has 
become  so  general  that  to  be  educated  no  longer  places  woman- 
hood on  a pedestal ; it  simply  broadens  horizons  and  opens  eyes 
to  the  opportunities  of  life  and  the  responsibilities  which  those  op- 
portunities bring.  The  union  of  the  intellectual  and  the  emotional 
gives  to  a woman  peculiar  fitness  for  work  in  uplifting  humanity. 
Her  response  to  need  is  quick,  her  sympathy  keen  and  her  interest 
personal,  and  when  she  adds  to  these  qualities  an  intelligent 
understanding  of  conditions  and  the  power  of  discrimination  she 
becomes  a power  in  all  efforts  for  the  common  welfare. 

Why  should  the  peace  movement  make  a special  appeal  to 
women  with  their  greater  interest  in  matters  of  common  welfare, 
their  new  outlook  beyond  the  walls  of  their  own  homes  and  the 
eager  interest  which  gives  a vitality  to  all  their  work? 

First,  because  of  its  practical  character.  We  talk  about  the 
mingling  of  the  races  and  a world  unity,  and  we  have  only  to 
step  from  our  own  doorway  to  see  the  possibility  made  a reality. 
Jew  and  Greek,  Teuton  and  Slav,  Hindu  and  Celt,  mingle  in  the 
current  of  life  on  the  streets  of  this  city.  No  country  is  alien, 
no  race  unknown.  Naturally,  inevitably,  there  is  developing  a 
unity  of  interests,  of  customs,  of  ideas  among  the  representatives 


99 

of  the  most  diverse  races,  and  the  way  is  open  as  never  before 
for  presenting  the  ideal  of  world  unity. 

The  fundamental  principles  of  the  movement  enter  into  the 
most  common  experience,  for  they  govern  all  just  and  pure  liv- 
ing. How  can  we  preach  justice  to  the  nations  when  dealing 
unjustly  with  the  representatives  of  those  same  nations  in  the 
tenement  districts  of  our  own  city;  or  strive  for  world  unity 
when  busy  in  erecting  barriers  between  classes?  Oppression  of 
a weaker  nation,  the  crushing  out  of  its  individuality  and  the 
enslavement  of  its  people,  is  not  unlike  the  industrial  oppression 
which,  for  the  sake  of  gain,  would  force  little  children  into  the 
slavery  of  the  cotton  mills  and  men  and  women  into  labor  which 
makes  of  life  a mere  warfare  for  existence.  On  the  other  hand 
the  attempt  to  transform  a city  into  a place  “where  men  live  a 
common  life  for  noble  ends”  is  a long  step  toward  world  unity. 

The  task  is  not  a light  one,  but  it  can  be  accomplished  if 
there  is  developed  a keen  sense  of  individual  responsibility. 
Privilege  always  means  responsibility  and  “noblesse  oblige”  be- 
longs to  the  present  as  truly  as  to  the  past.  It  places  upon  the 
womanhood  of  America  the  obligation  of  working  in  every  prac- 
tical way  for  the  principles  for  which  the  peace  movement  stands ; 
for  the  rights  of  the  weak,  whether  they  be  little  children  in  the 
factory  and  women  in  the  sweat-shop,  or  a defenseless  people 
across  the  seas ; for  the  recognition  of  the  oneness  of  the  great 
human  family,  as  real  among  the  classes  of  New  York  as  among 
the  nations  of  the  world;  for  the  right  of  the  individual  as  a 
human  being,  whether  he  be  an  American  in  Turkey  or  a China- 
man or  Negro  in  America;  for  the  promotion  of  justice  and  arbi- 
tration instead  of  injustice  and  force,  in  industrial  as  well  as  in 
international  relations. 

Secondly,  the  peace  movement  makes  a strong  appeal  be- 
cause of  its  ideal  character.  In  our  exaltation  of  what  is  prac- 
tical, we  sometimes  overlook  the  truth  that  ideals  are  the  condi- 
tion of  all  progress  and  one  of  the  greatest  dangers  of  the  pres- 
ent age  is  the  attempt  to  build  a state  minus  an  ideal.  It  is  the 
duty  of  education  to  withstand  this  drift  in  the  national  life  and 
to  maintain  that  the  development  of  the  material  resources  of  a 
country  come  second  to  the  development  of  the  highest  nature 
of  its  citizens.  In  a certain  sense  every  woman  is  an  educator, 
although  the  sphere  of  her  work  may  be  more  often  the  home  or 


IOO 


society  than  the  school  room.  It  is  unnecessary  to  emphasize  to 
this  audience  the  value  of  educating  the  life  in  the  principles  on 
which  it  should  be  established.  In  social  work,  in  religious 
training,  in  intellectual  culture,  this  truth  is  recognized.  If  we 
would  substitute  arbitration  for  brute  force,  peace  for  war,  an 
ideal  of  world  unity  for  national  and  racial  antagonisms,  the 
reasonable  hope  of  permanent  accomplishment  of  these  ends  lies 
in  the  education  of  the  children  and  the  youth  of  to-day,  the 
men  and  women  of  to-morrow.  “Imitation  enters  into  the  very 
fastnesses  of  character’'  and  the  ideals  held  before  the  child  de- 
termine to  a great  extent  what  the  man  will  be.  It  is  because 
of  the  strength  of  this  appeal  to  the  imagination  that  the  proposed 
naval  and  military  display  at  Jamestown  is  capable  of  accomplish- 
ing so  great  harm.  If  we  really  wish  to  develop  the  spirit  of 
mercy,  rather  than  that  of  cruelty,  to  exalt  reason  rather  than 
violence,  why  not  depict  “the  enticing  splendors  of  peace”  instead 
of  “the  enticing  splendors  of  war”  ? 

The  peace  movement  places  the  emphasis  upon  the  man 
who  can  think  rather  than  upon  the  one  who  can  fight ; it  would 
make  right  stronger  than  might;  subordinate  selfish  interests 
to  the  common  good,  allay  passion,  promote  self-control  and  give 
to  individual,  nation  and  race  the  opportunity  to  “set  the  noblest 
free.” 

“Prognostics  told 

Man’s  near  approach;  so  in  man’s  self  arise 
August  anticipations,  symbols,  types 
Of  a dim  splendor  ever  on  before 
In  that  eternal  circle  life  pursues. 

For  men  begin  to  pass  their  nature’s  bound 
And  find  new  types  and  cares  which  fast  supplant 
Their  proper  joys  and  griefs;  they  grow  too  great 
For  narrow  creeds  of  right  and  wrong,  which  fade 
Before  the  unmeasured  thirst  for  good ; while  peace 
Rises  within  them  ever  more  and  more.” 

Mrs.  Spencer: 

We  have  already  touched  upon  the  great  new  coming 
conflict,  that  which  is  signalized  by  “a  motion  toiling  in  the 
gloom,  yearning  to  mix  itself  with  life” ; the  great  movement 
by  which  a new  industrial  order  is  establishing  itself  among  the 


IOI 


institutions  of  mankind.  One  of  the  best  things  about  the 
militarism  of  the  old  pioneer  of  civilization  was  his  protection 
of  the  women  and  the  children.  As  a last  resort  in  defending 
his  home,  the  little  ones  were  placed  in  the  center,  the  mothers 
next,  and  the  men  outside.  We  work  to-day  to  carry  over  into 
the  new  industrial  order  that  chivalry  of  the  Age  of  Militarism. 
We  have  not  reached  it;  our  children  are  not  protected  in  the 
center ; they  are  exploited  in  industrial  places ; our  women  work 
more  hours  than  their  own  health  and  welfare,  or  the  welfare 
of  the  next  generation  justifies,  and  other  monster  evils  attend 
our  industrial  life.  Our  next  speaker  will  take  us  still  deeper 
into  this  great  question,  the  relation  of  industry  to  the  Peace 
Movement.  She  comes  here  as  the  representative  of  the 
Consumers’  League,  a movement  intended  to  organize  the 
conscience  of  the  buyer,  and  make  the  purchasing  public  a factor 
in  industrial  regeneration — Mrs.  Frederick  Nathan,  President  of 
the  New  York  Consumers’  League. 

Industry  and  Its  Relation  to  Peace 

Mrs.  Frederick  Nathan. 

In  primeval  days  it  is  possible  that  the  individual  savage 
was  wholly  independent.  It  is  probable  that  he  was  able  to 
procure  for  himself  all  his  limited  requirements.  But  the  earliest 
savage  life  of  which  we  have  any  knowledge  reveals  to  us  the 
fact  that  even  in  primitive  days  men  were  interdependent,  al- 
though within  narrow  group  limitations.  Gradually  the  advance 
of  intellect  has  evolved  an  industrial  interdependence  which  leads 
us  at  the  present  time  to  become  inhabitants  of  the  world  in 
satisfying  our  wants. 

It  is  a far  cry  indeed  even  from  the  colonial  days  of  our 
great  grandmothers  to  our  present  day.  Our  ancestors  very 
largely  produced  all  that  was  required  for  their  lives.  In  their 
own  fields  were  grown  the  flax,  the  hemp,  the  cotton,  which  they 
themselves  spun  and  wove  into  material  which  in  turn  was  cut 
and  fashioned  by  their  own  hands.  In  their  own  gardens  grew 
the  vegetables  and  fruits  which  they  themselves  prepared  and 
canned  and  pickled  for  their  own  consumption.  The  heads  of  the 
household  often  did  their  own  butchering  of  live  stock,  while  the 
women  members  attended  to  the  raising  of  poultry,  the  needs 
of  the  dairy,  the  making  of  raisin  wine,  of  soap,  of  rope  and 


102 


twine,  of  candles  for  illumination,  and  of  rag  carpets  for  the 
floor.  They  even  confessed  to  covering  their  own  furniture. 

But  when  the  invention  of  some  cumbersome  machinery 
took  all  these  industries  out  of  the  home,  work  was  done  under 
entirely  different  conditions  and  all  labor  has  gradually  been  revo- 
lutionized until  we  find  to-day  that  so  specialized  has  all  work 
become,  that  even,  for  instance,  in  the  making  of  a cotton  under- 
garment, not  only  are  a large  number  of  people  utilized,  but  as 
many  as  a half-dozen  countries  may  contribute  to  its.  production. 

Trade,  which  in  the  early  days  was  a mere  species  of  organ- 
ized piracy,  warfare  thinly  hidden  under  a milder  name,  has 
gradually  developed  to  be  a great,  if  not  the  greatest  agency  for 
peace.  The  merchant,  though  perchance  unwitting  and  unwill- 
ing, has  become  the  benefactor  of  the  race. 

The  need  for  international  relationship  in  commerce  and  in- 
dustry, the  need  for  world  markets  and  the  interchange  of  pro- 
ducts, has  led  to  the  holding  of  great  World’s  Fairs.  These  In- 
ternational Industrial  Expositions  have  drawn  the  Nations  to- 
gether in  peaceful  rivalry  and  have  shown  by  object  lessons  of 
unexampled  power  how  the  work  of  the  world  demands  peace 
and  fraternity  among  all  mankind.* 

As  commerce  and  manufacture  have  become  more  obviously 
the  leading  elements  in  our  civilization,  governments  have  as- 
sumed industrial  functions.  Our  consular  reports,  widely  dis- 
tributed, without  cost,  upon  demand,  are  filled  with  matter  con- 
cerning the  various  industries  of  the  different  countries,  and 
reporting  all  data  of  value  to  our  manufacturers  and  importers. 

In  former  days  treaties  were  drawn  up  between  countries  to 
settle  boundary  lines,  to  decide  amounts  of  indemnity  to  be  paid, 
to  bind  each  other  to  mutual  assistance  in  the  event  of  war  with 
other  nations.  They  were  at  best  mere  armed  truces,  temporary 
pauses  in  perpetual  war.  But  two  years  ago  an  epoch-making 
treaty  was  drawn  up  between  the  delegates  representing  fourteen 
European  countries,  which  had  for  its  fundamental  basis — not  a 
plan  for  the  exploitation  of  their  citizens,  either  by  taxation  for 
indemnities,  or  by  pledging  their  men  to  be  used  as  targets  for 
bullets — but  ( mirabile  dictu)  a plan  to  protect  their  citizens  by 
mutually  agreeing  to  prohibit  the  work  of  women  in  factories  at 
night.  This  sprang  from  a similar  narrower  movement  of  the 
year  before,  when  the  governments  of  France  and  Italy  arranged 


103 

the  earliest  labor  treaty,  providing  for  factory  inspection,  aboli- 
tion of  night  work  for  women,  reduction  of  hours  for  women,  a 
day  of  rest  once  a week,  and  granting  to  French  and  Italian  co- 
laborers in  both  countries  equal  treatment  in  respect  to  payment 
of  pensions,  and  sick  and  accident  benefits. 

Yet  another  European  treaty  has  recently  been  made,  one 
more  remarkable  still  in  its  high  moral  purpose.  It  aims  to  place 
industrial  competition  on  a higher  level ; it  forbids,' — getting 
down  to  practical  detail — forbids  the  use  of  white  or  yellow 
phosphorus  in  match-making.  The  fumes  of  this  phosphorus  are 
specially  dangerous  to  the  working  men  and  women  employed 
in  the  manufacture  of  matches,  and  various  governments  had 
long  wished  to  forbid  its  use,  but  were  met  by  the  manufacturers’ 
cry  that  their  competitor  in  other  lands  used  it  and  would  under- 
sell them.  So  matches  intended  to  enlighten  the  world  were 
made  in  the  darkness  of  cruelty,  and  inhumanity.  Now  at  last 
seven  nations  have  combined,  and  it  seems  we  are  to  have  truly 
enlightened  matches. 

Verily  may  we  feel  that  we  have  at  last  begun  to  enter  upon 
a new  era,  prophesied  by  Jane  Addams  in  her  new  book,  “The 
Newer  Ideals  of  Peace,”  the  triumph  of  industrialism  over  mili- 
tarism. In  these  treaties  the  representatives  of  Great  Britain 
and  Continental  Europe  aimed  to  “protect  their  civic  resources,” 
to  nurture  the  real  wealth  of  their  nations,  the  health  of  their 
peoples.  Strange  to  say,  our  country,  which  is  supposed  to  stand 
for  the  highest  ideals  of  democracy,  is  far  behind  these  European 
governments  in  this  respect. 

Only  recently  three  of  the  five  judges  of  the  Appellate  Divi- 
sion of  the  Supreme  Court  of  this  city  rendered  a majority  de- 
cision to  the  effect  that  our  state  law,  which  had  been  enacted 
about  ten  years  ago,  prohibiting  night  work  for  women,  was  un- 
constitutional. The  fact  that  fourteen  other  nations  have  found 
it  practicable  and  expedient  to  pledge  themselves  to  refrain  from 
working  their  women  at  night,  should  have  at  least  a moral  effect 
upon  our  nation  and  the  highest  court  may  reverse  this  decision. 

Not  only  have  governments  united  in  passing  laws  for  the 
protection  of  their  working  people  and  in  the  interest  of  humane 
industry  and  enlightened  commerce,  but  the  general  public  has 
become  awakened  to  its  responsibilities  as  consumers,  and  has 
organized  the  conscience  and  intelligence  of  the  buyer  as  a means 


104 

of  social  progress.  This  is  a movement  toward  universal  peace 
and  international  fraternity. 

To-day  conscientious  consumers  who  wish  to  know  under 
what  conditions  the  articles  which  they  consume  are  made,  con- 
sumers who  realize  that  their  demands  create  the  supply  and 
therefore  desire  to  inform  themselves  intelligently  in  regard  to 
the  sources  of  supply,  are  made  aware  of  the  fact  that  the  bound- 
ary line  of  their  investigations  is  measured  only  by  the  boundaries 
of  the  civilized  globe.  For  example,  in  the  case  of  the  cotton 
undergarment,  the  cotton  may  have  been  grown  in  Alabama, 
where  child  labor  is  not  restricted,  and  is  even  authorized  at 
night,  it  may  have  been  spun  and  woven  by  machines  attended 
by  little  children  under  the  tender  age  of  ten.  This  machinery 
may  have  been  made  in  England  and  its  transportation  here  have 
necessitated  the  utilization  of  ships  and  ship  provisions  from 
countless  evil  sources.  Or  the  raw  cotton  may  itself  have  been 
transported  to  England  for  manufacture.  Or  again  the  goods 
may  have  been  bleached  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  where  there 
are  no  laws  prohibiting  child  labor,  and  the  garment  having  been 
cut  in  a factory,  may  have  been  'stitched  in  some  wretched  germ- 
infected  sweat-shop  in  our  own  city.  The  coal  for  all  this  factory 
work  may  have  been  procured  from  Pennsylvania  mines  where 
hundreds  of  little  boys  work  in  the  breakers.  As  for  the  trim- 
ming on  the  garment,  the  embroidery  may  have  been  worked  by 
hand  in  Switzerland  or  France,  at  starvation  rates,  in  a prison 
or  in  a convent,  or  else  it  may  have  been  made  by  machinery  in 
Germany.  The  lac’e  may  have  been  made  under  the  most  trying 
conditions  in  Belgium,  France  or  Italy;  the  pearl  buttons  may 
have  been  manufactured  in  Austria,  and  the  material  for  them 
have  been  procured  from  the  Persian  Gulf  or  the  Red  Sea.  The 
garment  may  have  been  laundered  in  some  Chinese  laundry, 
where  the  soap  used  had  been  made  in  a Chicago  beef-packer’s 
factory,  and  finally  the  garment  reaches  the  consumer  through  the 
wholesale  merchant,  who  sells  it  to  the  retail  merchant,  who  may 
underpay  and  overwork  the  saleswoman  who  effects  the  final  sale. 

Women  constitute  a very  large  percentage  of  the  purchasing 
public.  As  the  years  go  by  (no  doubt  owing  to  the  propaganda 
of  the  Consumers’  League),  an  increasingly  large  number  of 
women  show  a desire  to  acquire  their  purchases  with  such  peace 
of  conscience  as  is  assured  them  by  the  treaty  which  prohibits 


105 

night  work  for  women.  Instead  of  making  individual  efforts  to 
discriminate  in  favor  of  goods  free  from  the  taint  of  cruelty  in- 
volved in  night  work,  their  consciences  are  freed,  once  for  all, 
by  that  treaty  as  to  all  goods  from  all  the  countries  bound  by  it. 
Would  that  similar  treaties  were  enacted  extending  the  exemp- 
tion from  night  work  to  young  boys ! That  treaty  is  the  stepping- 
stone  which  must  necessarily  lead  to  further  industrial  gains,  to 
be  accomplished  by  the  same  enlightened  method,  which  makes 
for  International  Peace. 

The  industries  of  the  different  nations  are  their  mainstay, 
and  carry  wealth  to  their  centers,  and  are  like  the  arteries  in 
our  bodies,  carrying  blood  to  the  heart,  the  constant  action  of 
which  renews  our  vitality.  To  these  facts  mankind  is  at  last 
awakening.  War  is  becoming  too  businesslike  for  a business 
generation.  It  costs  too  much, — costs  not  only  to  the  conquered, 
but  to  the  conqueror.  In  destroying  his  enemies,  he  destroys  at 
least  in  part  the  source  of  his  own  wealth.  Hence  the  necessities 
of  industry  work  eternally  for  peace. 

Realizing  that  we  have  thus  reached  a point  far  beyond  tribal 
isolation  and  that  we  must  in  future  recognize  our  international 
commercial  bonds,  an  International  Conference  has  been  ar- 
ranged, to  be  held  next  July  in  Switzerland,  to  be  attended  by 
delegates  from  the  various  European  Consumers’  Leagues,  for 
the  exchange  of  ideas  and  experiences  relating  to  the  different 
standards  of  production  and  distribution  in  different  countries. 
The  aim  is  eventually  to  establish  an  international  standard  of 
the  ethics  of  labor. 

The  feeling  of  universal  brotherhood  has  already  been  aided 
by  this  international  movement,  aided  more  perhaps  than  most 
of  us  realize.  Women  can  indeed  be  proud  of  the  fact  that 
largely  through  their  efforts  this  Consumers’  League  movement 
has  been  organized  and  fostered. 

Although  women  are  rarely  given  a voice  in  the  matter  of 
deciding  whether  war  shall  be  proclaimed  or  not,  the  maintenance 
of  the  family  falls  largely  upon  the  women  in  times  of  war. 
Women  suffer  in  war  as  well  as  in  peace,  for  that  matter,  from 
the  reduction  in  wages  and  the  increased  taxes,  due  to  the  cost  of 
armies  and  navies. 

From  1897  to  I9°4  the  United  States  spent  $307,000,000  for 
military  purposes.  An  expenditure  of  $200,000,000  is  now  con- 


io6 


sidered  “normal,”  so  great  has  been  the  increase  during  the  last 
few  years.  Yet  when  a bill  was  recently  passed  by  Congress 
providing  for  the  investigation  of  conditions  of  industry  under 
which  women  and  children  in  our  country  work,  the  clause  pro- 
viding for  an  appropriation  for  the  task  was  deliberately  stricken 
out,  thus  making  the  entire  bill  practically  worthless. 

Hence  it  seems  that  our  land  has  fallen  behind  in  the  advance 
toward  industrial  harmony,  and  industrial  prosperity  and  har- 
mony are  the  mightiest  impulses  making  for  perpetual  peace. 
This  country,  which  planned  the  first  International  Peace  Con- 
gress, and  which  led  the  world  in  organized  work  for  peace,  has 
left  to  other  hands  the  consummation  of  the  work.  Can  we  not 
return  to  our  place  in  the  forefront  of  the  mighty  struggle — 
the  great  War  for  Peace! 

Mrs.  Spencer:  An  object  of  most  intense  interest  is  a 
noble  personality  embodying  a great  ideal.  I have  only  this  word 
in  introduction  of  our  next  speaker,  Miss  Jane  Addams,  head  of 
Hull  House,  Chicago. 

New  Ideals  of  Peace 

Miss  Jane  Addams. 

We  sometimes  forget  when  we  belittle  war  and  its  glittering 
paraphernalia  that  after  all  it  represents  a series  of  ideas  and  emo- 
tions which  have  been  very  dear  to  men  from  the  beginning  of 
time.  In  the  same  way  that  the  historic  church,  striving  in  vain 
to  express  in  solid  form  the  noblest  aspirations  of  the  human 
heart,  has  called  to  her  aid  music,  the  cathedral,  the  procession, 
the  ecclesiastical  vestment, — so  War,  desiring  to  impress  the 
human  mind  with  the  courage  of  the  soldier,  his  readiness  to  die, 
his  willingness  to  surrender  all  to  patriotism,  has  called  to  its 
aid  music,  the  march  and  the  gold-bedecked  uniform.  All 
through  the  centuries  whether  men  were  driven  in  tribes  by  the 
pangs  of  hunger  to  find  land  and  food  outside  of  their  own  terri- 
tory, or  whether  they  were  impelled  by  the  dynastic  ambition  of 
their  rulers,  by  religious  enthusiasm  or  by  imperial  vanity  they 
have  clothed  warfare  in  high-sounding  language  and  it  has  always 
had  behind  it  noble  emotions  and  fine  endeavor  at  least  on  the 
part  of  the  men  actually  engaged  in  it. 


107 

If  we  would  for  a moment  dream  that  we  may  abolish  war 
by  supplementing  these  historic  emotions  by  others  more  benefi- 
cent, by  turning  into  newer  channels  the  waters  which  have  flowed 
so  long  in  these  heroic  ways,  then  we  must  put  ourselves  to  it  to 
discover  and  substitute  ideas,  to  let  loose  other  emotions,  to  find 
incentives  which  shall  seem  as  strenuous,  as  heroic,  as  . noble  and 
as  well  worth  while  as  those  which  have  sustained  this  long 
struggle  of  warfare. 

Living  as  we  do  in  an  industrial  age,  it  would  seem  reasonable 
to  look  for  these  substitutes  first  in  the  long  history  of  industrial 
progress.  A rapid  historic  review  makes  it  quite  clear  that  when 
human  life  was  still  in  the  tribal  stage  the  men  of  the  tribe 
went  forth  in  numbers  in  order  to  secure  the  raw  material  for 
food  and  shelter  and  they  brought  the  trophy  of  the  chase 
back  into  the  tribe,  that  the  women  there  might  transform  it  into 
available  form;  the  flesh  of  the  wild  creature  into  proper  food 
and  the  pelt  into  clothing.  In  this  early  life  women  performed 
as  positive  a service  as  men  did,  but  owing  to  a difference  in 
kind,  women  were  trained  in  patience  and  endurance,  men  in 
heroic  and  sudden  action.  Woman’s  part  in  this  life,  broadly 
speaking,  was  industrial,  as  man’s  was  military,  but  the  distinc- 
tion was  made  more  marked  by  the  fact  that  the  industrial  activ- 
ity was  performed  more  and  more  in  family  isolation,  while  men 
who  went  forth  to  hunt,  to  pillage  and  to  fight,  found  their  suc- 
cess ever  more  dependent  upon  numbers.  Men  thus  early  learned 
to  act  together,  to  incite  themselves  by  war  cries  or  by  the  calls 
of  the  chase,  to  lean  upon  each  other  for  defense  and  achievement. 
While  women  only  occasionally  came  together  in  a mutual  task, 
men  were  constantly  driven  into  an  inter-relation  and  quite 
naturally  and  inevitably  they  developed  the  beginnings  of  the 
army.  Finally  its  very  size  became  an  exhilaration,  the  bigger 
the  army  the  more  sure  they  were  that  their  cause  was  just  and 
victory  secure. 

This  broad  division  between  the  work  of  women  and  men 
has  held  throughout  the  centuries,  women’s  work  tending  to 
center  in  the  home,  and  man’s  work,  even  after  he  organized  in- 
dustry and  commerce,  still  being  carried  on  in  groups.  Al- 
though man  pits  one  group  against  another  in  this  later  organiza- 
tion, and  the  spirit  of  competition  is  but  the  thinly-disguised  spirit 


io8 

of  war,  he  still  clings  to  the  army,  for  it  represents  to  him  at 
once  his  most  primitive  and  most  stirring  life. 

But  during  the  past  one  hundred  years  woman’s  traditional 
activity  has  changed  its  form  and  her  family  isolation  has  been 
rudely  broken  in  upon.  Her  historic  activities  are  carried  on  in 
great  factories,  so  that  if  women  would  continue  their  old  busi- 
ness of  turning  raw  material  into  food  for  human  consumption, 
and  fashioning  fibers  and  wool  into  garments,  it  must  be  done  in 
inter-relation  with  hundreds  of  other  people.  If  women  would 
perform  their  tasks  as  efficiently  under  the  factory  system  of  in- 
dustry as  they  did  formerly  under  the  domestic  system  of  industry 
they  must  learn  to  work  in  large  groups  as  they  learned  formerly 
to  work  in  family  isolation. 

I think  it  was  Ruskin  who  used  to  say  that  if  the  first  can- 
non which  was  fired  in  the  next  British  war  should  demolish  all 
the  china  in  every  English  woman’s  china-closet,  England  would 
never  have  another  war.  Let  us  say  that  if  the  first  cannon  to  be 
fired  in  the  next  war  should  bring  to  the  heart  of  every  woman 
throughout  the  two  nations  involved,  the  consciousness  that  it 
was  going  to  kill  thousands  of  little  children  either  because  they 
were  to  be  deprived  of  their  fathers  and  of  their  homes,  as  they 
have  been  in  South  Africa,  or  for  a dozen  other  causes,  there 
would  not  be  another  war.  Of  course  if  women  visualized  the 
results  of  war  as  they  might  visualize  the  destruction  of  china, 
there  would  not  be  another  war.  We  fail  to  bring  about  the  end 
of  war  simply  because  our  imaginations  are  feeble.  They  are  so 
inadequate  that  they  lag  behind  even  the  industrial  organization 
of  the  moment.  The  poets  and  the  musicians  who  might  help  us 
by  an  inspirational  interpretation  of  industry  also  fail  us  and 
we  do  not  rise  to  the  occasion  which  the  organization  of  industry 
at  the  present  moment  offers  to  women.  For  the  first  time  in 
the  history  of  the  world  women  have  the  opportunity  of  carrying 
on  their  legitimate  work  in  groups  and  definite  inter-relations, 
not  only  with  each  other  but  with  all  society.  What  might  not 
happen  if  women  realized  that  the  ancient  family  affection,  that 
desire  to  protect  and  rear  little  children  which  they  have  expressed 
so  long  in  isolation,  might  now  be  socialized  and  be  brought  to 
bear  as  a moral  force  on  the  current  industrial  organization. 
Personally  I do  not  believe  that  the  glamour  of  war  will  ever  pass 
to  the  side  of  construction  and  conservation,  that  it  will  ever  be 


iog 

possible  to  make  industry  seem  as  heroic  as  war  has  seemed 
unless  we  can  do  something  of  this  sort.  Why  do  we  not  do  it? 
Do  the  habits  of  isolation  still  cling  to  women?  Do  women  fail 
to  move  forward  together  because  they  have  lacked  the  training 
in  comradeship  and  forward  march  that  the  army  has  afforded 
to  men,  or  because  they  have  failed  to  consider  these  deeper 
things  of  life  in  their  social  aspects?  It  may  be  that  they  are 
still  content,  as  they  have  always  been,  to  look  at  life  from  the 
purely  domestic  point  of  view  and  when  industry  has  changed 
from  the  domestic  system  to  the  factory  system  that  they  are 
morally  totally  unprepared  to  make  the  corresponding  social 
advance. 

Mrs.  Nathan  has  referred  to  a conference  of  diplomatic  rep- 
resentatives held  in  Berne  last  September  when  fourteen  nations 
agreed  that  within  their  borders  women  should  not  be  permitted 
to  engage  in  manufacture  during  the  night  hours.  These  diplo- 
matic representatives  on  that  occasion  at  least  dropped  the  affairs 
of  warfare  and  statecraft  and  considered  the  affairs  of  industry 
in  their  international  relation.  In  doing  this  they  entered  into 
the  realm  which  has  traditionally  and  historically  belonged  to 
women.  They  contended  that  the  health  of  women  gave  way 
under  night  work,  that  if  long  continued  it  was  certain  to  inter- 
fere with  their  maternal  duties  and  with  the  vigor  of  their  chil- 
dren, and  they  were  considering  the  human  side  of  industry  when 
they  contemplated  the  loss  to  the  nation  in  the  sacrifice  of  child 
life  and  of  normal  domesticity.  But  although  those  subjects 
have  always  been  the  concern  of  women,  it  is  quite  safe  to  assert 
that  women  had  little  part  in  the  calling  of  this  conference,  or 
in  carrying  it  forward.  The  affairs  of  the  industrial  world  are 
largely  outside  of  woman’s  interest  and  knowledge,  and  yet  we 
know  that  these  great  industrial  processes  will  not  go  on  properly 
if  they  are  unregulated  and  uncared  for,  that  women  in  failing  to 
ameliorate  them,  to  guide  them,  to  do  the  things  which  they  have 
always  done  are  failing  simply  because  industry  has  suddenly 
taken  a large  form.  It  is  no  longer  domestic,  but  has  become  col- 
lective. Because  we  are  dull  and  untaught  we  are  failing  to 
bring  into  industry  that  concern  for  the  weak  which  may  ex- 
press itself  through  sacrifice  and  courage,  that  defense  and  com- 
radeship which  might  unite  groups  of  workers  into  spiritual 
bonds  and  lift  up  industrial  progress  into  a tremendous  national 


no 


motive  for  work  and  efficiency.  When  structural  iron  workers 
build  a bridge,  almost  exactly  the  same  percentage  of  them  are 
wounded  and  killed  as  of  men  who  engage  in  battle,  but  as  yet 
we  utterly  fail  to  regard  them  as  an  example  of  industrial 
heroism,  and  they  fall  not  as  heroes,  but  as  victims. 

When  men  and  women  meet  together  to  consider  seriously 
what  may  be  done  to  advance  the  cause  of  Peace  one  longs  to 
make  this  suggestion,  that  we  pour  into  industry  something  of 
that  comradeship  which  has  so  long  belonged  to  war,  something 
of  that  glamour  which  Tolstoy  declares  adheres  in  the  drum  itself, 
so  that  when  men  hear  a certain  beat  they  leave  everything  to 
follow  the  call.  Cannot  we  formulate  a call  for  industrial  serv- 
ice? Cannot  we  predict  that  woman’s  traditional  work  will  go 
forward  worthy  of  its  domestic  beginnings,  that  the  wolfish 
eagerness  of  the  chase  and  of  the  battlefield  shall  be  mitigated 
by  the  defence  of  the  weak  and  the  education  of  the  young?  War, 
the  old  enemy  of  industry  and  of  the  home,  many  of  us  believe  is 
passing  out  of  society.  It  may  leave  us  sordid  and  materialistic 
or  its  passing  may  prove  the  challenge  to  a finer  and  more  humane 
endeavor  than  war  could  possibly  arouse. 

Mrs.  Spencer: 

Sir  Edgar  Elgar,  the  eminent  musical  composer  of  London, 
was  to  have  been  with  us  this  morning,  but  unfortunately  is 
prevented  by  illness.  We  have  just  heard  one  of  his  beautiful 
compositions,  and  therefore  feel  that  he  is  represented,  as  an 
artist  prefers  to  be,  by  his  work. 

Mr.  William  Archer,  the  dramatic  critic  of  the  London 
Tribune,  is  with  us  and  will  presently  address  us,  and  I want  to 
say  that  although  this  may  be  called  a women’s  meeting,  men 
are  in  sympathy  and  present  with  us.  The  gavel  that  I was 
allowed  to  use  in  calling  the  meeting  to  order,  was  handed  to 
me  by  Mr.  Powderly,  in  testimony  that  organized  labor  welcomed 
women’s  work  for  Peace;  and  other  organizations  of  men  have 
shown  courtesy.  I take  great  pleasure  in  introducing  Mr. 
Archer,  the  distinguished  dramatic  critic. 

The  Flag  of  Peace 

William  Archer. 

Madam  President,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  The  short 
paper  which  I propose  to  read  to  you,  and  which  I wish  I could 


Ill 


deliver  without  reading,  is  called  “The  Flag  of  Peace,”  a plea 
for  the  United  States  of  Europe,  and  I think  you  will  find  that 
the  admirable  address  of  Miss  Jane  Addams  formed  a prelude 
to  my  remarks,  in  so  far  as  she  seems  to  believe  that  Peace 
should  not  leave  entirely  to  war  the  spectacular  element,  but 
that  we  should  try  to  employ  the  spectacular  element  on  the  side 
of  Peace.  That  is  also  the  keynote  of  the  thought  I have  now 
to  present  to  you. 

There  is  nothing  new  in  the  idea  that  the  United  States  of 
America  ought  to  serve  as  a model,  or  rehearsal,  for  the  United 
States  of  Europe.  I myself  expressed  it  seven  or  eight  years  ago, 
in  a little  book  upon  America;  and  though  I do  not  know  that 
I actually  borrowed  or  stole  it  from  anyone,  I was  certainly  not 
the  first  to  hit  upon  so  obvious  a thought.  A recently  published 
extract  from  a commonplace  book  of  Henrik  Ibsen’s  shows  that 
the  essence  of  the  idea  was  present  to  his  mind  at  some  time  ante- 
rior to  the  unification  of  Germany  in  1870.  He  says:  “We 
laugh  at  the  four-and-thirty  fatherlands  of  Germany;  but  the 
four-and-thirty  fatherlands  of  Europe  are  equally  ridiculous. 
North  America  is  content  with  one,  or — for  the  present — with 
two.”  I am  far,  then,  from  imagining  that  this  thought,  in  itself, 
will  have  any  novelty  for  you.  What  I wish  to  do  is  to  suggest 
a practical  affirmation  and  application  of  the  idea,  which  may 
have  occurred  to  others,  but  has  certainly  not  yet  been  put  in 
practice. 

My  thought  is  briefly:  “Why  should  Europe  wait?  There 
are  unquestionably,  in  every  country  of  Europe,  thousands  of 
men  and  women  who,  though  they  may  be  ardent  lovers  of  their 
native  land,  have  eliminated  from  their  patriotism  the  taint  of 
international  envy,  jealousy  and  rancor.  These  people  are 
already,  in  spirit,  citizens  of  the  United  States  of  Europe:  why 
should  they  not  formulate  and  assert  that  citizenship?  Why 
should  they  not  make,  to-day  or  to-morrow,  their  Declaration  of 
Independence  from  historic  hatreds  and  racial  antagonisms?  In 
short,  why  should  not  we,  who  are  of  this  way  of  thinking,  forth- 
with establish  the  United  States  of  Europe,  hoist  and  salute  the 
Union  flag,  and  consciously  and  deliberately  proceed  to  live  in 
that  Union,  to  realize  it  in  our  thoughts,  to  cortsolidate  it  in  our 
endeavors,  to  sanctify  it  in  our  sentiments  and  affections  ?”  That 
is  the  question  I wish  ultimately  to  put  to  you ; and  when  I have 


1 12 


more  fully  explained  its  implications,  I hope  you  will  answer  with 
me,  “Why  not?” 

Perhaps  I may  best  illustrate  the  idea  by  telling  you  how  it 
came  to  me.  I was  reading  “The  Future  in  America,”  by  Mr. 
H.  G.  Wells.  And  here,  in  parenthesis,  let  me  record  my  belief 
that,  with  some  scattered  flaws,  that  is  a wise  and  good  book, 
worthy  of  very  careful  attention  on  this  side  of  the  Atlantic. 
The  point  is  immaterial  to  my  present  purpose;  but  as  Mr.  Wells 
gave  the  immediate  impulse  to  the  idea  I am  trying  to  express,  I 
should  hold  it  ungrateful  not  to  bear  witness  in  passing  to  the 
esteem  in  which  I hold  that  humane  and  stimulating  thinker. 

Mr.  Wells  relates  how  he  was  taken  by  “a  pleasant  young 
lady  of  New  York,  who  seems  to  find  sustaining  happiness  in 
Settlement  work  on  the  East  Side,”  to  see  American  citizens  in 
the  making  at  the  Central  School  of  the  Educational  Alliance  in 
East  Broadway.  He  proceeds  : 

“It’s  a thing  I am  glad  not  to  have  missed.  I recall  a large, 
cool  room  with  a sloping  floor,  rising  tier  above  tier  of  seats  and 
desks,  and  a big  class  of  bright-eyed  Jewish  children,  boys  and 
girls,  each  waving  two  little  American  flags  to  the  measure  of  the 
song  they  sang. 

“ ‘God  bless  our  native  land’  they  sang — with  a considerable 
variety  of  accent  and  distinctness,  but  with  a very  real  emotion. 

“Some  of  them  had  been  in  America  a month,  some  much 
longer,  and  here  they  were — being  Americanized.  They  sang  of 
America — ‘sweet  land  of  liberty’ — they  drilled  with  the  little 
bright,  pretty  flags,  swish  they  crossed  and  swish  they  waved  back, 
a waving  froth  it  was  of  flags  and  flushed  children’s  faces;  and 
then  they  stood  up  and  repeated  the  oath  of  allegiance,  and  at  the 
end  filed  tramping  by  me  and  out  of  the  hall.” 

“ ‘It  is  touching,’  whispered  my  guide.  ‘I  told  her  it  was  the 
most  touching  thing  I had  seen  in  America.’ 

“And  so  it  remains.” 

“Think  of  the  immense  promise  in  it ! Think  of  the  flowers 
of  belief  and  effort  that  may  spring  from  this  warm  sowing !” 

Here,  then,  I dropped  the  book  and  did  think.  I thought  of 
the  Stars  and  Stripes  waved  by  millions  of  childish  hands  from 
Maine  to  New  Mexico,  from  the  Florida  Keys  to  Puget  Sound ; 
and  I thought  how  the  sentiment  of  affection,  of  devotion,  thus 
engendered  and  fostered,  was  the  true  cement,  the  inde- 


H3 

structible  and  ever-renewed  force  of  cohesion,  holding  together 
these  vast  and  varied  territories  which  we  call  the  United 
States.  You  have  here  greater  distances  than  those  which 
separate  the  remotest  corners  of  Europe.  You  have  all  sorts 
of  physical  and  climatic  differences,  begetting  differences  of 
temperament,  of  manners,  of  material  interests.  You  have  such 
a medley  of  races  as  has  never  before  been  included  in  one 
commonwealth,  save,  perhaps,  the  Roman  Empire.  You  have, 
in  short,  many  principles  of  disunion,  of  dissension,  of  strife; 
while  you  have  not,  as  in  the  Roman  Empire  as  aforesaid,  as  in 
the  Russian  Empire,  as  in  the  British  Empire  of  India,  any  potent 
military  organization  creating  a sort  of  mechanical  and  super- 
imposed unity.  What  have  you  in  place  of  this  external  bond 
which  constituted  Pax  Romana,  and  constitutes,  so  far  as  India  is 
concerned,  the  Pax  Britannica?  You  have  simply  the  sentiment 
of  devotion  to  the  national  flag — or  rather,  I may  say,  in  the  best 
and  noblest  sense,  to  the  Imperial  flag.  For  the  greatest  Republic 
on  earth  may  quite  as  justly  be  called  the  greatest  Empire  on 
earth — the  greatest  aggregate  of  sovereign  and  self-governing 
States,  bound  together  by  a sentiment,  an  ideal,  which  merges 
all  differences  of  local  ideal,  sentiment  and  interest,  and  makes 
the  very  thought  of  internecine  war  a monstrosity  and  a horror. 
That  ideal,  that  emotion,  symbolized  in  your  beautiful  stars  and 
stripes,  is  the  great  asset  of  the  American  citizen — a material  as 
well  as  a spiritual  asset,  since  it  means  his  exemption  from  the 
major  part  of  the  ever-growing  burdens  imposed  on  us  Euro- 
peans by  our  suspicions  and  fears  of  our  next-door  neighbors. 
So  long  as  other  quarters  of  the  world  are  still  prompt  to  resort 
to  the  stupid  arbitrament  of  blood-stained  iron,  it  behooves  the 
Republic  to  be  prepared  for  self-defense,  and  for  her  share  in  the 
policing  of  the  world.  But  the  United  States,  in  itself,  is 
untouched  by  the  international  rancors,  jealousies  and  cupidities 
which  keep  Europe  under  arms.  It  is  conceivable,  indeed,  that 
the  problem  of  the  distribution  of  wealth,  so  urgent  on  both  sides 
of  the  Atlantic,  may,  on  either  side,  lead  to  bloodshed ; but  that  is 
a wholly  different  matter  from  the  strife  of  nation  against  nation 
to  which  we  are  hourly  exposed  in  Europe.  It  is  what  the  insur- 
ance companies  would  call  another  order  of  risk,  which  we  may 
eliminate  from  our  present  problem.  And  why  have  you  not, 
over  this  vast  continent,  nation  glaring  at  nation,  with  half- 


8 


1 14 

timorous,  half-murderous  and  wholly  evil  eyes,  across  here  a river, 
there  a mountain  range,  or  perhaps  across  some  even  less  tangi- 
ble barrier,  which  is  the  mere  symbol  of  “old,  unhappy,  far-off 
things  and  rancors  long  ago  ?”  Why,  because  you  have,  from  the 
very  first  moments  of  your  national  history,  wisely,  sedulously  and 
heroically  maintained  and  cultivated  that  intense  emotion  regard- 
ing your  national  unity,  and  its  symbol  in  red,  white  and  blue, 
which  Mr.  Wells  saw  already  implanted  in  those  alien  children 
whom  your  hospitable — perhaps  too  hospitable — empire  had  taken 
to  her  bosom.  I say  that  Mr.  Wells  would  have  been  not  only  a 
very  stupid  Englishman,  but  a bad  citizen  of  the  world,  had  he 
witnessed  that  spectacle  without  emotion ; and  I think  no  good 
citizen  of  the  world  can  possibly  fail  to  share  the  emotion  which 
thrilled  him. 

And  now  I come  to  what  is  perhaps  a ticklish  point  in  my 
argument.  You  may  have  noticed  how  I said  that  you  had 
“heroically”  maintained  the  sentiment  of  national  unity.  That 
was  an  allusion,  of  course,  to  the  fact  that  your  unity  had  been 
preserved  at  the  cost  of  the  most  terrible  civil  war  recorded  in 
history.  Here,  then,  the  scoffer  may  not  unnaturally  say : “Why 
vaunt  the  efficacy  as  a peace  preserver  of  a sentiment  which  has 
failed  to  prevent,  within  the  past  half-century,  a war  at  least  as 
destructive  as  any  of  those  which  have  arisen  from  the  interna- 
tional rancors  and  cupidities  which  it  is  supposed  to  obviate? 
Ladies  and  gentlemen,  I will  answer  this  objection,  perhaps  para- 
doxically, by  saying  that  it  ought  to  have  been  more  strongly  put. 
Not  only  did  the  sentiment  of  unity  not  prevent  the  great  Civil 
War;  it  was  at  bottom  the  motive  and  source  of  that  gigantic 
struggle.  The  question  of  slavery  was  doubtless  that  which  pre- 
cipitated the  war ; but  the  real  question  at  issue  was  the  principle 
of  unity  against  duality,  or  rather  multiplicity.  Once  admit  the 
right  of  secession,  and  every  State  or  group  of  States  which  felt 
its  immediate  interests  divergent  from  those  of  its  neighbors 
would  have  broken  away,  marked  out  its  frontier  line  with  forts 
and  custom  houses,  and  proceeded  to  glare  across  the  said  fron- 
tier in  that  overburdened,  overwrought,  nerve-straining  condition 
of  suspended  belligerency  which  we,  in  Europe,  miscall  Peace. 
The  strong  sense  of  the  Northern  States  instinctively  realized  that 
to  suffer  this  condition  of  things  to  arise  would  be  to  throw  away 
the  one  unique  and  inestimable  advantage  which  history  and 


H5 

geography  had  conspired  to  bestow  upon  the  American  people. 
They  felt  that  at  all  hazards  this  “flying  in  the  face  of  Provi- 
dence” must  be  prevented;  and  they  heroically  paid  the  price  of 
its  prevention.  I am  not  afraid  to  confess  that,  in  point  of  what 
may  be  called  abstract  legality,  I think  the  South  had  at  least  as 
strong  a case  as  the  North ; and  I am  full  of  admiration  for  its 
pathetic  clinging  to  its  not  ignoble  ideals.  But  the  ideals  of  the 
-South  were  allied  to  the  past,  the  ideals  of  the  North  were  in 
league  with  the  future.  Therefore  I read  with  peculiar  emotion 
the  history  of  that  battle  of  the  giants ; for  I feel  it  to  have  been, 
in  very  truth,  a war  for  peace  and  a victory  for  peace.  Terrible 
as  was  the  price  paid,  I think  it  was  well  paid,  and  paid  once 
for  all. 

However  much  we  may  deplore  the  fact  that  the  ideal  of  the 
Union  had  thus  to  be  baptized  in  blood  and  tears,  it  would  be 
folly,  I think,  not  to  recognize  that  this  baptism  has  given  a 
peculiar  sanctity,  among  all  the  flags  of  the  world,  to  the  Stars 
and  Stripes.  It  is  a sanctity  which  may  be  profaned  by  thought- 
less and  boastful  flag-flaunting — or  in  other  words  by  a spirit  of 
what  we  in  England  call  Jingoism.  But  in  its  ideal,  and  in  a 
great  many  of  its  actual  manifestations,  the  sentiment  with  which 
Americans  regard  their  national  flag  is  a noble  and  beautiful 
thing,  and  full  of  hope,  as  I now  proceed  to  suggest,  not  for  the 
United  States  alone,  but  for  the  whole  world.  Such  a sanctity 
as  attaches  to  your  flag  cannot  be  created  by  an  act  of  will,  or  in 
a moment  of  time.  But  there  must  be  a beginning  to  everything. 
The  Stars  and  Stripes  themselves  were  once — and  not  so  many 
generations  ago — a new,  an  unfamiliar,  a provisional,  a question- 
able thing.  What  I want  to  ask  is  why  the  United  States  of 
Europe  should  not  even  now  have  their  own  Union  flag,  and 
cultivate  in  all  generous  and  forward-reaching  souls — in  all  souls 
that  are  young,  whatever  be  the  age  of  their  physical  integu- 
ment— an  enthusiastic  and  lyrical  sentiment  towards  it,  such  as 
that  which  Mr.  Wells  saw  growing  in  the  breasts  of  the  new-made 
American  citizens  down  in  East  Broadway. 

A flag,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  is  a very  beautiful  thing,  a 
thing  of  spirit-stirring  appeal.  It  has  color,  it  has  movement,  it 
has  life.  It  floats  in  the  clear  air  above  like  a silent  watchword 
of  inspiration,  leading  our  eyes  and  thoughts  upward,  far  above 
the  petty  passions  and  distractions  of  the  common  day.  I think 


n6 

the  Stars  and  Stripes  the  most  inspiriting  flag  in  the  world, 
because  it  is  peculiarly  the  flag  of  Peace;  but  far  be  it  from  me 
to  deny  or  dissemble  the  emotion  awakened  in  me  by  my  own 
flag,  the  flag  of  England, 

The  flag  that’s  braved  a thousand  years 

The  battle  and  the  breeze, 

and  that  now  floats  over  so  many  great  and  free  communities.  It 
is  true  that  in  bygone  centuries,  in  Europe  and  even  in  America, 
the  appeal  of  the  flag  has  been  largely  a warlike  one,  has  been 
intimately  associated  with  bellicose  and  aggressive  passions.  But 
there  is  no  inherent  reason  why  it  should  be  so ; and  I think  we, 
in  Europe,  might  well  inaugurate  this,  our  new  century,  by  hoist- 
ing a new  flag,  the  banner  of  the  United  States  of  Europe,  which 
should  be  distinctively  and  characteristically,  the  Flag  of  Peace, 
and  should  symbolize  our  hope,  or  rather  our  faith,  in  a new  era 
of  humanity  and  reason,  not  so  very  far  off.  Such  a flag  would 
provide  a rallying-point  for  all  who  share  that  faith,  or  even  that 
hope — for  all,  in  short,  whose  will  is  a will  for  Peace.  It  would 
be  associated  with  no  religious  creed,  with  no  political  party. 
Christian  and  Pagan,  Catholic  and  Protestant,  Conservative  and 
Radical,  Individualist  and  Socialist,  could  alike  gather  round  it, 
and  find,  in  the  circle  of  its  influence,  a common  standing-ground, 
perhaps  even  a common  understanding  ground.  It  could  fly  side 
by  side  with  any  national  flag,  for  it  would  imply  no  sort  of  dis- 
loyalty to  that  symbol — only  the  cancelling,  in  its  connotation,  of 
the  element  of  hatred,  malice  and  uncharitableness.  It  would,  in 
a word,  give  visible  and  inspiriting  expression  to  the  sentiment 
which  animates  us  here,  and  which  animates  thousands'  of  men 
and  women  in  all  parts  of  the  world.  It  would,  no  doubt,  meet 
with  some  derision  at  first,  both  from  the  thoughtless  mob  and 
from  the  cynical  and  shallow  theorist  who  cannot  believe  that 
reason  will  ever  come  to  its  rights,  or  that  the  thoughts  of  men 
are  widened  with  the  process  of  the  suns.  But  what  matters  a 
little  derision?  A sentiment  of  zeal  and  devotion  would  soon 
grow  up  around  the  Flag  of  Peace  among  all  who  have  “free 
souls” ; and,  as  the  passage  from  Mr.  Wells  so  vividly  suggests, 
that  sentiment  might  be  infused  from  their  earliest  years  into  the 
blood  and  nerves  of  the  rising  generation.  Wherever  two  or 
three  were  gathered  together  in  the  name  of  peace — whether  in  a 


' 


Lady  who  lovest  and  who  livest  Peace, 

And  yet  didst  write  Earth’s  noblest  battle  song 
At  Freedom’s  bidding— may  thy  fame  increase 
Till  dawns  the  warless  age  for  which  we  long  ! 

— Frederick  Lawrence  Knowles. 


ii  7 

palace  at  The  Hague  or  in  a country  meeting  house,  or  in  a 
schoolroom  in  the  slums — there  the  Flag  of  Peace  should  be  dis- 
played, the  emblem  of  the  United  States  of  Europe. 

I am  no  artist,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  nor  have  I had  time 
to  take  counsel  with  designers.  But  I suggest  that,  in  the  form 
of  the  flag,  the  analogy  with  the  Stars  and  Stripes  should  be 
emphasized.  The  star,  as  it  is  the  most  wonderful  of  all  visible 
things,  is  the  most  beautiful  of  all  symbols ; and  I have  floating 
in  my  mind  a vision  of  a Star  of  Stars — a star-cluster  grouped  so 
as  to  form  a single  star — which  I think  might  perhaps  serve  the 
purpose.  To  that  Star  we  and  our  children  might  quickly  learn 
to  look  up  with  pride,  with  hope,  with  reverence.  Under  the 
guidance  of  that  star  we  should  march  forward  to  a new  world, 
freed  from  the  awful  burden,  the  pitiful  stupidity  of  war;  for  it 
would  indeed  be  a star  of  sweet  influence,  radiating,  in  very  truth, 
the  spirit  of  peace  on  earth  and  good-will  towards  men. 

Mrs.  Spencer: 

I hold  in  my  hand  two  telegrams  peculiarly  appropriate  to 
our  English  guests,  and  to  our  meeting  this  morning.  The 
Daughters  of  the  American  Revolution  telegraph  their  sympathy 
with  the  Peace  Congress,  testifying  that  out  of  that  which  is 
divided  comes  that  which  is  united;  also  the  Daughters  of  the 
Confederacy  send  us  a cordial  greeting  in  token  that  our  country 
is  really  one.  On  this  platform  sit  representatives  of  North 
Carolina  and  Massachusetts,  Alabama  and  Maine,  California 
and  Texas,  and  many  other  States  of  the  North  and  South,  all 
united  in  this  cause.  We  are  one,  and  those  who  laid  down 
their  lives  on  either  side,  did  it,  as  Mr.  Archer  has  said,  in 
sacredness  of  consecration,  some  perhaps  not  understanding  what 
they  did,  and  none  recognizing  that  which  was  to  come. 

(Music.) 

Mrs.  Spencer: 

Julia  Ward  Howe,  one  of  our  guests  of  honor,  has  a 
greeting  for  this  meeting.  Owing  to  her  advanced  years  her 
family  were  not  willing  that  she  should  take  the  long  journey, 
therefore  she  could  not  be  present,  but  she  sends  her  daughter, 
Mrs.  Florence  Howe  Hall,  to  read  to  you  her  message. 

Mrs.  Florence  Howe  Hall: 

The  catastrophe  of  the  Franco-Prussian  war  in  1870  and 
the  subsequent  spoliation  of  France  by  victorious  Germans, 


n8 

awoke  in  the  minds  of  many  women  a sense  of  the  uselessness 
and  horror  of  war.  To  me  came  one  day  the  thought  that  women 
alone  know  the  cost  of  human  life,  since  it  is  always  purchased 
by  their  pain,  often  attended  with  danger,  and  even  with  the 
loss  of  life.  Women,  then,  it  seemed  to  me,  ought  to  have  the 
casting  vote  in  the  disposition  of  a value  so  dearly  purchased,  and 
always  at  their  expense.  This  last  familiar  fact  now  appealed 
to  me  with  a force  never  felt  before.  I cried  aloud:  “If  the 
women  of  the  world  would  unite  their  efforts  to  prevent  resort 
to  arms,  no  more  blood  would  be  shed  upon  the  battlefield.” 
I felt  this  so  strongly  that  it  seemed  as  though  I had  only  to 
express  my  conviction  to  rally  around  me  all  the  mothers  of 
mankind,  and  to  this  end  I determined  to  devote  immediate  and 
unremitting  labor.  My  first  act  was  to  write  and  publish  an 
“Appeal  to  Womanhood  Throughout  the  World.”  Through  the 
kindness  of  friends,  this  brief  document  was  translated  into  most 
of  the  tongues  of  modern  Europe  and  circulated  as  widely  as 
circumstances  would  allow. 

I next  bethought  me  of  gathering  together  the  men  and 
women  in  my  own  country  who  had  already  shown  some  interest 
in  the  cause  of  peace.  'Many  of  these  were  among  the  Friends, 
but  the  movement  had  extended  beyond  their  bounds.  I held 
long  meetings  in  New  York  and  in  Boston.  In  the  city  first 
named,  the  eminent  jurist,  David  Dudley  Field,  gave  me  his  aid 
at  my  first  meeting,  while  the  venerable  poet,  Bryant,  spoke  for 
me  on  a later  occasion. 

It  soon  occurred  to  me  that  one  day  in  every  year  might  be 
put  apart  for  especial  efforts  in  this  cause.  I chose  for  this  the 
second  day  of  June,  a time  of  the  year  in  which  open-air  meet- 
ings could  easily  be  held,  and  in  which  the  adornment  of  flowers 
was  easily  obtainable.  I gave  to  this  festival  the  name  of 
“Mothers’  Day,”  because  my  new  departure  rested  so  much,  in 
my  mind,  upon  the  sacred  claim  of  mothers  upon  the  lives  which 
they  had  given.  The  Universal  Peace  Society  of  Philadelphia 
kindly  welcomed  the  institution  of  Mothers’  Day,  which  was  to 
be  observed  with  floral  decorations  and  appropriate  exercises. 
For  some  years  the  day  was  observed  in  Boston,  with  lovely 
music  and  earnest  speech  and  argument.  In  1872,  I went  to 
England,  where  I at  once  sought  the  advice  of  Mrs.  Josephine  L. 
Butler.  She  said : “You  have  come  at  a fortunate  time.  The 


IIQ 

Government  ordinances  regarding  the  barrack  life  of  the  mili- 
tary have  awakened  much  opposition,  as  tending  to  break  up 
family  life  for  the  soldiers,  and  thus  to  introduce  an  element  of 
demoralization.”  Mrs.  Butler  gave  me  much  helpful  advice,  and 
some  helpful  introductions.  Through  her  aid  I visited  a number 
of  the  leading  cities  of  England,  holding  in  these  places  meetings 
which  were  numerously  attended,  and  at  which  the  magistrates 
of  the  town  sometimes  presided.  In  London  I hired  a hall  in 
the  well-known  Free  Masons  Tavern  for  a number  of  Sundays, 
advertising  a meeting  at  which  I was  the  only  speaker.  The 
attendance  on  these  occasions  was  larger  than  I had  dared  to 
hope.  I received  also  much  personal  kindness  among  my  new 
friends.  I may  mention  Professor  Seeley,  author  of  “Ecce 
Homo,”  Sir  John  Bowring,  poet  and  publicist,  and  the  sisters 
and  brother  of  John  Bright. 

A well-attended  meeting  at  Willis’  rooms  closed  my  efforts 
in  London. 

A flying  visit  to  Paris  gave  me  the  opportunity  of  intro- 
ducing my  theme  at  a public  convention,  and  when  I returned  to 
my  own  country  I felt  that  I had  done  all  that  I was  capable  of 
doing  in  behalf  of  a Women’s  Peace  Movement. 

What  has  made  the  difference  between  that  time  and  this? 
Two  things,  chiefly,  as  far  as  women  are  concerned.  These  are 
the  higher  education  now  conceded  to  them,  and  the  discipline  of 
associated  action  with  which  recent  years  have  made  them 
familiar.  Who  shall  say  how  great  an  element  of  progress  has 
unfolded  itself  in  this  last  clause?  Who  shall  say  what  pettiness 
of  personal  ambition  has  become  merged  in  the  higher  ideal  of 
service  to  the  state  and  the  world?  The  noble  army  of  women 
which  I saw  as  in  a dream,  and  to  which  I made  my  appeal,  has 
now  come  into  being.  The  mothers  have  a voice  in  the  councils 
of  the  nations.  On  the  wide  field  where  the  world’s  greatest  citi- 
zens band  together  to  uphold  the  highest  interests  of  society 
women  of  the  same  type  employ  their  gifts  and  graces  to  the 
same  end.  Oh,  happy  change ! Oh,  glorious  metamorphosis ! 
In  less  than  half  a century  the  conscience  of  mankind  has  made 
its  greatest  stride  toward  the  control  of  human  affairs.  The 
Women’s  Colleges  and  the  Women’s  Clubs  have  had  everything 
to  do  with  the  great  advance  which  we  see  in  the  moral  efficiency 


120 


of  our  sex.  These  two  agencies  have  been  derided  and  decried, 
but  they  have  done  their  work. 

If  a word  of  elderly  counsel  may  become  me  at  this  moment, 
let  me  say  to  the  women  here  assembled : “Do  not  let  us  go  back 
from  what  we  have  gained.  Let  us,  on  the  contrary,  ever  press 
forward  in  the  light  of  the  new  knowledge,  of  the  new  experi- 
ence. If  we  have  rocked  the  cradle,  have  soothed  the  slumber 
of  mankind,  let  us  be  on  hand  at  their  great  awakening,  to  make 
steadfast  the  peace  of  the  world.” 

Mrs.  Spencer: 

Our  other  guest  of  honor  is  here ; she  was  not  invited 
because  age  and  feebleness  had  retired  her  from  active  conflict, 
but  for  exactly  the  opposite  reason  that  she  is  still  in  the  field, 
the  active  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Peace  of  the  Inter- 
national Council  of  Women,  a body  including  in  its  member- 
ship the  National  Councils  of  Women  of  nineteen  of  the 
enlightened  nations  of  the  world.  We  have  not  used  the  time  of 
this  morning  for  the  presentation  of  the  work  of  women’s 
organizations,  but  inasmuch  as  the  International  Council  of 
Women  holds  a unique  and  commanding  position  in  respect  to 
the  Peace  Movement,  we  have  asked  our  honored  guest,  Mrs. 
May  Wright  Sewall,  to  present  a printed  summary  of  the  work 
of  the  Women’s  Councils  in  behalf  of  Peace  and  Arbitration, 
copies  of  which  are  distributed  throughout  the  audience.  In 
addition  Mrs.  Sewall  will  now  give  you  very  briefly  the  closing 
word  of  this  session. 

The  International  Council  of  Women 

Mrs.  May  Wright  Sewall 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen,  and  Delegates:  You  who  are 
my  auditors,  realize  that  between  the  other  honored  guest  and 
myself,  measured  by  time,  there  lies  a generation,  measured 
by  service  much  more  than  a generation.  It  is,  indeed,  Mrs. 
Spencer,  an  honor  to  have  been  invited  here  as  the  guest  of 
this  great  Congress,  but,  Oh ! I felt  it  was  not  an  honor  when 
the  price  was  my  silence  before  this  vast  assembly.  I have 
the  honor  to  bring  to  this  congress  the  great  interest  of  the  Inter- 
national Council  of  Women,  which  I think  will  be  introduced 
to  you  more  specifically  than  it  has  ever  been  before,  if  you  will 


121 


kindly  read  the  pamphlet  which  has  been  printed  by  this 
Congress  for  your  instruction  concerning  it.  Now,  it  is  from 
twenty-three  National  Councils,  Madam  President,  containing 
within  that  membership  seven  and  one-quarter  millions  of 
women,  that  I bring  greetings.  Could  I hope  to  speak  for  such 
a vast  multitude  in  three  minutes,  Madam  President?  No,  not 
in  three  hours. 

Organized  in  1888,  the  National  Council  of  Women  of  the 
United  States  committed  itself  unanimously  to  active  work  for 
the  promotion  of  Peace  and  International  Arbitration  as  the  one 
great  moral  cause  in  which  women  of  all  classes  and  all  organi- 
zations could  unite  their  efforts.  This  National  Council  wel- 
comed the  establishment  of  the  Hague  Tribunal  in  1899  by  ap- 
propriate resolutions  forwarded  to  the  Czar  of  Russia  through 
the  courtesy  of  the  State  Department  and  by  the  approval  of 
President  McKinley.  It  has  celebrated  the  establishment  of  the 
Hague  Court  each  18th  of  May  by  holding  Peace  Demonstra- 
tions. It  has  enlisted  the  interest  and  aid  of  clergymen,  lawyers, 
the  press,  important  organizations  and  leading  individuals  in  all 
walks  of  life  in  the  preparation  for  and  the  programs  and  reports 
of  these  meetings.  Over  1,400  such  Peace  and  Arbitration  meet- 
ings held  in  six  consecutive  years,  and  in  every  State  of  our 
Union,  except  Florida,  Mississippi  and  Alabama,  attest  the  deep 
and  widespread  interest  in  this  cause  on  the  part  of  the  women 
of  America. 

The  International  Council  of  Women  received  in  1897  from 
Lady  Aberdeen,  then  its  President,  a communication  urging  that 
“great  prominence”  should  be  given  in  the  organization  to  the 
subject  of  “International  Arbitration.”  At  the  second  quinquen- 
nial of  this  International  Council  this  subject  was  made  conspicu- 
ous through  the  holding  of  a great  public  meeting,  addressed  by 
representatives  of  all  the  National  Councils  then  affiliated.  At 
this  meeting  the  following  resolution  was  introduced  by  Mrs. 
Byles,  acting  as  the  representative  of  Baroness  Von  Suttner,  and 
seconded  by  Frau  Salenka,  who  had  initiated  the  demonstration 
meetings  in  support  of  the  Hague  Convention : 

Resolved,  That  the  International  Council  of  Women  take 
steps  in  every  country  to  further  and  advance  by  every  means  in 
its  power  the  movement  toward  International  Arbitration. 


1 22 


This  resolution,  unanimously  passed,  committed  this  great 
body  of  women  to  Peace  as  its  first,  and  for  five  years  its  only 
propaganda;  and  the  first  Standing  Committee  was  constituted 
to  promote  this  great  interest.  Since  1899,  therefore,  the  Inter- 
national Council  of  Women  has  stood  ready  to  be  used  for  the 
noble  purposes  of  the  promotion  of  social  Peace,  the  reduction 
of  armaments,  the  substitution  of  an  International  Tribunal  of 
Justice  for  warfare,  and  the  establishment  of  a permanent  Inter- 
national Parliament  which  shall  legislate  for  the  world,  as  the 
congress  or  parliament  of  each  of  its  constituent  parts  legislates 
for  a single  nation. 

But  I must  express  my  conviction  that  what  has  been  said  this 
morning  in  all  of  these  splendid  messages,  is  after  all  only  an 
indication  of  a means  to  an  end, — the  International  Parliament, — 
which  shall  ultimately  sit  to  legislate  for  the  nations  of  the 
world.  It  is  after  all  but  a means,  an  agency,  as  the  Interna- 
tional Court  of  Arbitration  is  but  a means,  so  I shall  hurriedly 
pass  the  means  and  try  to  propound  the  end  to  our  International 
Council,  the  end  that  looks  for  this  result,  not  for  the  abate- 
ment of  war,  but  for  its  extinction  (applause)  ; not  to  the  limi- 
tation of  armaments  but  the  remanding  of  the  war  ships  into  the 
museums  of  history,  where  it  will  require  as  much  patience  and 
skill  to  reconstruct  their  forms  and  rehabilitate  them  as  it  now 
requires  scientific  skill  to  reproduce  the  form  of  the  mastodon. 

Our  result,  our  ultimate  object,  is  the  cessation  of  all  war- 
fare by  the  extinction  of  all  competition,  by  the  supplanting  of 
competition  by  co-operation  (applause),  by  the  displacement  of 
hate,  all  international  hate  and  international  envy,  by  interna- 
tional affection.  That  is  indeed  no  sentimental  ground,  Madam 
President,  it  had  its  origin  in  our  creation,  born  out  of  the  heart 
of  God.  This  humanity,  which  the  conflict  of  its  development 
upon  this  plane  has  divided  into  so  many  races,  but  which  its 
evolution  into  the  likeness  of  its  father  shall  unite, — a United 
States  of  Europe,  Mr.  Archer  says.  Long  ago  the  International 
Council  announced  the  United  States  of  the  World.  These 
United  States  of  the  World  must  include  all  the  countries  of 
the  world,  from  the  Western  Plemisphere  where  the  sun  sets, 
onward  to  the  Orient  where  the  sun  rises, — where  it  still  rises 
obscured  not  by  any  abatement  of  its  power  of  enlightenment, 
but  only  obscured  by  the  narrow  limitations  of  national  patriot- 


123 

ism  of  nations,  only  obscured  by  ignorance  and  prejudice.  It 
is  the  Old  World  which  the  International  Congress  hopes  to 
include,  and  already  has  that  Old  World  begun  to  make  its  flag. 
This  banner  holds  but  one  star,  which  Mr.  Archer  has  suggested 
it  should  include.  Whether  that  banner  shall  be  the  ultimate 
banner  of  the  world,  we  cannot  say, — probably  not,  because  we 
are  all  in  an  evolutionary  movement,  and  the  International  Coun- 
cil of  Women  recognizes  itself  as  an  evolution.  The  possibility 
of  our  movement  has  been  born  out  of  the  struggles,  the  hopes, 
the  agitations,  the  growing  faith  in  the  other  movements  that 
have  tended  toward  the  salvation  of  humanity  and  the  solidarity 
of  humanity  for  which  our  Council  stands. 

Mrs.  Spencer: 

We  will  now  all  rise  and  dismiss  ourselves  with  the  hymn 
“Heroes  of  Peace.” 


HEROES  OF  PEACE. 

Anna  Garlin  Spencer.  Sir  Arthur  S.  Sullivan. 

Hail  the  Hero  workers  of  the  mighty  Past ! 

They  whose  labor  builded  all  the  things  that  last. 
Thoughts  of  wisest  meaning;  deeds  of  noblest  right; 

Patient  toil  in  weakness;  battles  in  the  night; 

Hail,  then,  noble  workers,  builders  of  the  Past! 

All  whose  lives  have  blest  us  with  the  gains  that  last. 

Hail  ye,  Hero  workers,  who  to-day  do  hear 
Duty’s  myriad  voices  sounding  high  and  clear; 

Ye  who  quick  responding,  haste  ye  to  your  task, 

Be  it  grand  or  simple,  ye  forget  to  ask! 

Hail  ye,  noble  workers,  builders  of  to-day, 

Who  life’s  treasures  gather,  that  shall  last  alway. 

Hail  ye,  Hero  workers,  ye  who  yet  shall  come, 

When  to  the  world’s  calling  all  our  lips  are  dumb ! 

Ye  shall  build  more  nobly  if  our  work  be  true 
As  we  pass  Life’s  treasure  on  from  Old  to  New. 

Hail  ye,  then,  all  workers,  of  all  lands  and  time, 

One  brave  band  of  Heroes  with  one  task  sublime. 


124 


FIFTH  SESSION 

COMMERCIAL  AND  INDUSTRIAL  ASPECTS 
OF  THE  PEACE  MOVEMENT 
Hotel  Astor 

Tuesday  Afternoon,  April  Sixteenth,  at  3 
MARCUS  M.  MARKS  Presiding 

Mr.  Marks  : 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : In  the  name  of  Mr.  Andrew 
Carnegie,  and  on  behalf  of  the  Committee  of  Commerce  and  In- 
dustry of  the  National  Peace  Congress,  I convey  to  you  all  a 
very  hearty  welcome  to  this  meeting. 

We  note  that  there  are  a large  number  of  ladies  present, 
but  is  it  surprising  to  find  them  at  a meeting  of  commerce  and 
industry  when  you  consider  that,  without  the  ladies,  commerce 
and  industry  would  be  bankrupt!  (Applause — laughter.) 

There  are  two  things  which  we  must  do  in  this  cause,  look- 
ing at  it  in  a practical  way.  The  one  is  to  express  a sentiment; 
the  second  is  to  back  up  that  sentiment  by  action,  by  practical 
deeds. 

The  merchants  and  manufacturers  of  this  country  are  so 
deeply  interested  in  the  cause  of  peace  that  they  will,  I am  sure, 
do  two  things : give  time  and  give  money  to  the  Peace  Move- 
ment. A great  battleship  costs  eight  million  dollars,  I under- 
stand. 

Baron  d’Estournelles  : Ten! 

Mr.  Marks:  Ten  million  dollars.  The  price  has  gone  up. 
(Laughter.)  Dollars  are  called  the  sinews  of  war.  Now,  let 
this  meeting  of  Industry  and  Peace  decide  that  dollars  are  the 
sinews  of  Peace.  (Applause.)  Because  I am  sure  that  the 
merchants  will  agree  that  a million  dollars  expended  in 
furthering  the  cause  of  Peace  will  save  more  than  one  ten-million 
dollar  warship.  And  that  is  a fine  investment  for  us  all. 

Merchants  have  a twofold  interest  in  encouraging  move- 
ments tending  to  substitute  a system  of  law  and  order  for  war 
in  the  settlement  of  differences  between  nations. 


125 

They  share  with  the  professional  community  the  sentimental 
aversion  to  the  injustice  and  terrors  of  war;  but  in  addition  to 
this  they  have  what  is  sometimes  called  a selfish  interest  which 
prompts  them  to  put  additional  energy  into  the  task  of  preserving 
peaceful  commercial  relations  at  home  and  abroad. 

For  commerce  (and  consequently  the  welfare  of  all  the 
people  of  every  country)  depends  upon  the  stability  of  govern- 
ment and  the  friendly  relation  between  nations,  for  the  uninter- 
rupted and  profitable  exchange  of  commodities  to  the  fullest 
extent.  The  fact  is  recognized  that  only  such  nations  as  are  in 
peaceful  and  friendly  contact  can  thoroughly,  sympathetically 
and  satisfactorily  study  and  supply  each  other’s  wants,  thus 
developing  mutual  trading  most  successfully.  I am  told  that 
some  merchants  preserve  a neutral  attitude  towards  the  Peace 
movement  because  they  believe  that  there  is  a financial  gain  in 
case  of  war  from  the  sale  of  battleships,  arms,  powder,  uniforms, 
food  and  other  necessaries.  It  may  be  true  that  these  calcula- 
tions are  correct  from  the  narrow  standpoint  of  their  own 
immediate  interests,  but  no  one  can  doubt  that  the  general 
financial  loss  caused  by  the  interruption  of  commerce  on  account 
of  war  far  offsets  this  small  gain  to  a few. 

But  can  it  be  that  there  is  a human  being  mean  enough  to 
use  this  as  an  argument,  or  to  act  upon  such  a motive,  to  be 
willing  to  have  his  fellow-man  suffer  incalculably  that  he  may 
profit  in  a small  degree? 

The  merchants  of  America  certainly  rise  above  any  such 
considerations  and  stand  shoulder  to  shoulder  with  the  statesmen 
and  the  professional  men  in  their  earnest  endeavor  to  extend  the 
spirit  of  brotherhood  till  it  embraces  all  mankind.  I can  speak 
authoritatively  on  this  point  for  the  National  Association  of 
Clothiers,  representing  the  third  largest  manufacturing  industry 
in  the  United  States.  At  our  National  Convention  held  in 
Boston  last  month  we  unanimously  and  enthusiastically  endorsed 
the  principles  and  aims  of  this  Peace  Congress.  And  as  I look 
you  in  the  eyes  to-day,  you  merchants  and  manufacturers,  repre- 
senting all  our  industries  in  every  section  of  our  great  country, 
I feel  absolutely  certain  that  when  you  are  asked  how  you  stand 
on  the  question  of  International  Peace  there  will  be  one  mighty 
“Aye !”  in  its  favor. 

We  all  recognize  the  fact  that  the  day  for  settling  differ- 


126 


ences  between  men  by  the  duel  is  practically  over.  As  individuals 
we  no  longer  try  to  decide  who  is  right  and  who  is  wrong  by 
test  of  swordsmanship  or  brute  strength,  but  resort  instead  to  the 
impartial  judgment  of  the  courts.  Is  it  not  time  that  differences 
between  nations  be  settled  in  the  same  manner,  not  by  arms,  but 
by  an  international  court  of  justice?  The  age  of  the  savage  has 
gone  forever.  Man  now  clasps  the  hand  of  his  fellow-man  in 
love,  and  Americans  who  bow  in  reverence  to  the  majesty  of  the 
law  of  our  land  should  be  the  first  to  extend  the  code  of  inter- 
national law,  so  that  the  death  struggle  between  nations  should 
be  no  more. 

Let  the  united  voice  of  the  business  community,  the  practical 
men  of  affairs  in  this  country,  ring  loud  and  true  so  that  its 
echo  reverberates  at  the  Hague  Peace  Conference  next  June  with 
the  message:  “Peace,  Peace,  Peace!”  (Applause.) 

Ladies  and  gentlemen,  if  a man  saves  a human  life  we  call 
him  a hero;  if  a man  saves  thousands  of  human  lives  what  shall 
we  call  him?  There  is  a man  here  present  at  my  right,  a 
nobleman — if  nobleman  there  ever  was — who,  by  sacrificing  his 
time,  his  means,  his  brain,  his  health,  has  saved  thousands  and 
thousands  of  lives  in  minimizing  war.  (Applause  and  cries  of 
“Hear!  Hear!”)  He  is  a man  who  stands  at  the  head  of  the 
gallant  band  throughout  the  world,  striving  for  a day  of  brother- 
hood among  men.  It  gives  me  pleasure — and  I consider  it  a 
great  honor — to  be  able  to  introduce  to  you  to-day  Baron 
d’Estournelles  de  Constant.  (Applause.) 

International  Conciliation 

Baron  d’Estournelles  de  Constant. 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : I should  not  like  to  deceive  you. 
I am  far  from  being  as  good  as  the  Chairman  says  (laughter), — 
I am  simply  a man  of  good-will.  It  is  as  a man  of  good- 
will and,  I should  say,  as  a man  of  some  experience,  that  I 
came  here,  and  that  I am  extremely  happy  and  proud  to  have 
this  splendid  opportunity  to  address  not  only  an  American 
audience,  but  especially  an  audience  of  American  business  men, 
American  people  devoted  to  the  great  questions  of  commerce  and 


127 

exchange,  which  are  indeed  questions  of  Peace  itself,  because 
you  cannot  separate  those  two  ideas,  commerce  and  Peace. 
(Applause.) 

Ladies  and  gentlemen,  yesterday  I said — or  I tried  to  say, 
because  it  was  not  very  easy  in  a very  large  room — I tried  to 
express  my  feeling  of  admiration  for  the  American  people — 
ladies  as  well  as  gentlemen — by  saying  that  they  are  keen  and 
clever  enough  to  understand  that  it  is  not  only  their  duty,  but 
their  interest,  to  meet  and  show  that  they  are  not  indifferent  to 
the  question  of  Peace.  In  Europe  they  are  indifferent ; in  Europe 
we  have  that  state  of  mind  which  has  been  so  aptly  described 
by  our  Chairman ; the  state  of  mind  of  a people  who  are  neutral, 
who  are  always  waiting  for  somebody  else  to  take  the  lead  in  a 
movement ; a state  of  mind  which  is  always  waiting  for  a 
progress  which  might  already  have  been  attained,  a progress  the 
realization  of  which  is  still  in  the  future.  But  in  America  I 
know  we  can  always  find  an  audience  receptive  to  high  ideas, 
and  I am  happy  and  proud  of  the  privilege  of  addressing  such 
an  audience. 

It  is  indeed  an  inspiring  thing  that  this  New  World,  under- 
standing the  truth,  should  show  it  to  the  Old  World,  and  that 
the  Old  World  should  follow  very  obediently  in  its  footsteps. 
(Applause.)  That  is  right;  we  must  not  complain;  it  is  much 
better  to  do  that  than  to  resist.  The  Europeans  will  follow  you ; 
they  will  follow  even  more  closely  if  they  see  that  you  have  not 
only  organized — shall  I say — sentimental  manifestations,  but 
that  you  have  brought  about  practical  ways  of  promoting  the 
progress  of  your  work  and  of  attaining  success. 

It  is  not  enough  for  us  to  say  that  we  are  devoted  to  truth, 
to  justice,  to  peace.  Those  are  mere  words.  We  all  agree  to 
the  expression  of  such  sentiments ; but  what  the  world  says  is 
that  we  are  always  speaking  of  very  fine  ideals  and  using  very 
fine  phrases,  but  that  we  do  not  speak  of  the  ways  and  means 
of  realizing  those  ideals. 

It  is  therefore  time  for  us  to  speak  of  the  means  and 
methods  of  carrying  out  our  ideals  of  international  justice.  For 
international  and  national  justice  are  now  very  clearly  defined. 
We  know  that  we  have  to  organize  arbitration;  that  arbitration 
is  much  better  than  quarreling;  that  arbitration,  of  course,  is 
much  better  than  war.  This  idea  has  become  understood  little 


128 


by  little,  and  it  is  because  it  is  understood  that  you  have  seen 
the  first  Hague  Conference,  which  has  been  practically  the  first 
international  tribunal.  But  this  practical,  very  practical  organi- 
zation, this  quite  matter-of-fact  organization,  has  not  yet  been 
fully  understood,  although  it  existed.  So  we  have  been  obliged, 
a few  friends  of  mine  and  myself,  to  come  here  and  ask  the 
American  people  to  take  the  lead,  to  ask  the  American  people 
to  show  the  way  for  these  new  institutions,  to  impress  European 
public  opinion  and  oblige  them  to  make  use  of  this  great  Court. 

It  is  not  an  old  story,  it  is  quite  a recent  one,  and  very 
striking.  In  1902,  three  years  after  the  meeting  of  the  first 
Hague  Conference,  the  Hague  Court,  the  permanent  tribunal, 
had  been  founded,  but  nobody  wanted  to  use  it.  The  govern- 
ments said  it  is  of  no  use.  I said,  “Of  course  it  is  of  no 
use,  but  simply  because  you  do  not  make  use  of  it.  (Laughter.) 
It  is  for  you  to  use  it ; if  you  do  not  use  it,  do  not  reproach  the 
tribunal,  reproach  yourselves/’  But  they  did  not.  (Laughter* — 
applause.)  They  did  not,  and  I must  tell  you  that  the  only 
man  who  understood  that  was  your  President,  Theodore 
Roosevelt.  (Applause.)  This  is  not  paying  him  a vain  compli- 
ment ; it  is  true,  and  that  is  one  reason  why  he  has  been 
considered,  and  is  considered  now,  as  one  of  the  great  pacifi- 
cators of  our  times. 

President  Roosevelt,  seeing  that  it  was  a great  pity  that 
this  new  institution,  still  greater  than  your  great  Supreme 
Court,  had  been  created  and  was  not  used,  said : “What  shall 
I do  to  give  it  life,  to  give  it  true  existence?  Well,  the  simplest 
thing  is  to  give  it  a case,  I must  give  it  something  to  do — 
something  to  eat,  if  you  like.” 

So  the  government  of  the  United  States  and  the  govern- 
ment of  the  Republic  of  Mexico  agreed  to  send  to  the  Hague 
Court  its  first  case,  about  this  time  of  the  year  1902.  That  was 
the  beginning,  and  anyone  would  have  thought! — as  I myself 
did — that  that  would  have  been  sufficient  to  persuade  the  other 
governments  to  follow  the  example.  No,  no;  not  enough.  In 
a few  months  a very  serious  difficulty  arose,  about  which  many 
of  you  know  very  well.  It  was  a very  great  difficulty,  the 
Venezuela  affair.  Several  European  countries  were  involved  in 
it.  It  would  have  been  rather  disastrous  to  start  a war  of  all 
Europe  against  that  poor  little  Venezuela.  So  it  became  a matter 


129 

of  arbitration,  and  would  you  not  have  thought  that  the  Euro- 
pean governments,  being  obliged  to  arbitrate,  would  at  last  have 
wanted  to  go  before  the  Hague  Tribunal?  Not  at  all.  Instead 
they  sent  a very  fine  telegram  to  President  Roosevelt,  asking  him 
to  be  the  arbitrator,  and  hoping  that  he  would  be  flattered  by 
their  offer.  They  believed  that  President  Roosevelt  would  be 
weak  enough  to  accept  that  honor  and  forget  the  Hague  Court, 
that  he  had  been  the  first  to  advocate.  Fortunately, — and  that  is 
what  I admire  about  him  above  everything — President  Roose- 
velt was  firm  enough,  good  enough,  straightforward  man 
enough  (applause),  to  send  a plain  and  very  decisive  answer.  He 
said:  “No,  I cannot  accept  that.  I stick  to  The  Hague.”  (Ap- 
plause and  cries  of  “Hear!  Hear!”)  “I  stick  to  The  Hague,”  he 
said.  “You  have  created  that  European,  that  international,  that 
universal  institution ; it  is  to  be  used.  It  has  been  good  once, 
it  will  be  good  another  time,  for  another  experiment.  Let  us  go 
to  The  Hague.”  And  then  the  lethargy  was  broken,  and  to-day 
that  Hague  Court  is  full  of  life;  for  since  that  time  the  govern- 
ments, when  they  were  obliged  to  follow,  wanted  to  follow  alto- 
gether. They  have  signed  treaties  of  arbitration,  and  every- 
body now  is  wanting  to  sign  such  treaties ; everybody  is  wanting 
to  go  to  the  Hague  Court;  and  I consider  that  very  great  prog- 
ress. This  progress  is  in  large  part  due  to  President  Roosevelt, 
to  American  initiative  and  energy.  But  there  is  another  influ- 
ence, a very  good  influence,  which  I must  not  forget  to  speak 
about.  One  of  the  reasons  why  the  Plague  Court  had  been  for- 
gotten and  left  alone  was  because  it  was  poor.  It  had  no  home, 
it  had  no  place  for  the  judges,  for  the  cases  of  the  future,  except 
a very  unsatisfactory  little  building,  which  had  to  be  let  every 
year.  There  we  have  another  sample  of  the  disdain  of  govern- 
ments. They  would  spend  thousands  of  millions  every  year  for 
war  expenses,  but  they  could  not  give  a few  dollars  for  the  be- 
ginning of  the  organization  of  Peace.  They  refused  the  small 
amount  of  money  needed  for  this  great  scheme,  and  then  Ameri- 
can initiative,  American  energy,  arose.  It  was  Mr.  Andrew 
Carnegie  who  said:  “It  may  be  that  the  Hague  Court  is  dis- 
dained because  it  is  poor,  but  if  we  give  it  a home,  if  we  endow 
it,  then  it  will  receive  consideration,”  and  that  consideration  has 
come  because  Mr.  Carnegie  gave  to  the  Court  of  The  Hague  a 
very  fine  and  very  large  palace,  worthy  of  the  Court,  worthy  of 


9 


130 

Europe,  worthy  of  America.  (Applause.)  Was  I not  right  in 
telling  you,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  that  you  may  be  proud  of  your 
country?  It  may  be  that  the  Hague  Court  is  far  away  from 
us,  it  may  be  that  the  Hague  Court  is  in  Europe,  but  it  is  living 
because  of  the  initiative,  living  because  of  the  heart  and  the  in- 
telligence of  America.  (Applause.) 

Now,  to  come  back  to  a practical  view  of  the  subject,  you 
are  quite  right  in  supporting  such  a movement.  This  movement 
in  favor  of  international  justice  must  not  be  the  mere  devotion 
of  one  man,  even  a man  such  as  the  first  magistrate  of  your 
great  Republic.  It  must  be  the  devotion  of  your  whole  country. 
You  must  not  leave  to  the  President,  or  to  a few  statesmen,  the 
great  honor  of  supporting  the  idea  of  international  justice.  You 
must  all  take  your  share  in  that  support,  and  that  is  why  I am 
so  happy  to  see  that  you  have  come  here  in  such  large  numbers, 
representing  so  great  a strength  as  the  strength  of  the  commer- 
cial, industrial  and  the  agricultural  activities  of  the  United 
States. 

It  is  a very  noble  thing,  and  I assure  you  that  what  you 
have  done  to-day  will  not  be  lost  in  France,  in  Germany,  or  in 
England.  I found  many  difficulties.  Many  of  my  friends,  even 
of  my  relatives,  said  that  when  I left  my  fine  career  of  diplomat, 
I lost  everything.  They  said  that  I have  lost  myself,  yet  in 
France  I still  find  everywhere  very  good  friends,  devoted  friends, 
who  have  been  touched  by  the  very  great  difficulties  I met;  and 
I can  tell  you  that  it  is  a very  strengthening  thing  to  find,  as  I 
found,  more  friends  in  my  difficulties  than  I did  in  my  fine  days. 
(Great  applause.)  I have  found  friends  whom  I can  trust,  and 
I am  not  so  sure  about  the  first  ones.  (Applause.)  When  1 
go  back  to  France,  when  I tell  them  that  you  in  America  are 
so  interested  in  this  great  question,  they  will  be  pleased,  because 
they  want  this  encouragement.  It  will  not  be  lost,  and  you  will 
see  them  in  a very  short  time  trying  to  shake  hands  with  you 
and  trying  to  organize  something. 

Organize  what?  We  never  lose  sight  of  that  question  of 
organization.  We  now  have  arbitration,  which  is  much  better 
than  war,  but  we  must  find  something  that  will  be  still  better 
than  arbitration.  This  something  you  will  find,  I know,  and  you 
will  give  it  life.  Arbitration  is  very  good,  because  it  settles  the 
difficulties  when  they  arise,  but  it  is  still  more  important  to  settle 


I3I 

these  difficulties  before  they  arise.  Settle  them  before,  but  how? 
That  is  very  easy.  Of  course,  I do  not  say  that  we  can  settle  all 
difficulties.  Human  nature  is  so  different,  and  we  have  difficul- 
ties even  with  ourselves.  I do  not  know  whether  you  in  America 
are  as  I am — in  perpetual  conflict  with  myself.  (Laughter.) 
At  times  there  are  two  men  speaking  in  me,  one  who  tries  to  be 
good,  but  the  other  who  is  not  always  so  good.  (Laughter.) 
The  bad  one  sometimes,  very  often,  tries  to  give  me  very  bad 
advice.  (Laughter.)  But  I try  not  to  follow  such  advice,  and 
then  arises  the  conflict.  Then  I must  settle  that  conflict  by 
arbitration,  but  I try  to  avoid  having  the  conflict.  That  is  still 
better.  You  must  have  that  prevention  organized,  if  you  can. 
What  is  the  best  way  ? I will  tell  you : after  many,  many,  many 
researches  I found,  through  my  friends  in  France  and  in  other 
countries  in  Europe,  I found  that  everywhere,  and  chiefly  in 
commerce,  there  are  many  men  and  women  who  are  extremely 
devoted  to  their  work,  but  they  are  always  speaking  of  Ameri- 
can money.  In  America  as  in  France — of  course,  money  is  a 
means  and  a way  of  doing  things — but  here  as  in  France,  also 
many  good  people  are  more  devoted  to  their  conscience,  to  the 
good  of  their  country,  to  the  good  of  their  kind,  than  to  money 
and  material  interests.  (Applause.)  All  the  good  people  of 
our  time  need  only  one  thing — to  know  each  other.  When  one 
man  is  isolated  he  is  weak,  he  can  do  almost  nothing;  he  hardly 
dares  to  express  what  he  feels,  because  he  feels  so  lonely  in 
this  immense,  indifferent  world.  But  put  all  these  good  men 
and  women  into  relations  with  each  other,  let  them  become 
acquainted,  let  them  correspond,  so  that  they  can  exchange  their 
ideas  and  information,  then  instead  of  isolation  and  weakness, 
you  will  get  a real  and  powerful  strength. 

That  is  what  we  have  been  doing  with  that  very  small  thing 
which  was  at  first  our  International  Conciliation  movement.  It 
was  a very  small  thing,  indeed,  like  a germ ; but  this  small  thing 
is  growing  and  will  become  great.  This  International  Conciliation 
movement  is  to  be  developed  from  the  groups  of  the  good  people 
of  every  country,  and  when  a group  of  the  good  people  in  every 
country  has  been  created,  then  will  come  a kind  of  federation — 
a trust,  if  I may  say  so — of  all  the  national  groups ; and  these 
people  from  all  over  the  world  will  make  the  most  powerful 
association  you  can  imagine.  It  is  not  an  association  for  money ; 


132 

it  is  not  an  association  for  power,  but  it  is  an  association  for 
insuring  the  triumph  of  good-will.  If  you  do  not  have  this  asso- 
ciation, if  good-will  always  remains  silent  and  inactive,  you  may 
be  sure  that  bad  passions,  that  jingoism  and  selfishness  are  sure 
to  win  without  a struggle.  If,  on  the  contrary,  you  associate,  it 
will  be  easy  for  you  at  once  to  prevent  the  misunderstandings,  the 
difficulties  and  sometimes  the  catastrophies  which  arise  from 
ignorance  alone. 

Now  this  is  so  well  understood  in  America,  certainly  among 
the  best  of  the  public  men,  the  politicians,  artists,  business  men, 
agriculturists,  and  the  clergy,  that  they  have  said  that  it  is 
the  right  thing  to  do,  to-morrow.  Now  you,  ladies  and  gentle- 
men, you  must  try  to  help.  We  do  not  ask  for  money,  at  least 
I do  not  ask  for  money.  What  I want  is  your  moral  help,  your 
clear  knowledge,  your  clear  intelligence  applied  to  your  own  inter- 
ests. If  you  understand  your  own  interests  you  will  understand 
the  interests  of  all  the  world,  because  there  is  no  antagonism, 
there  is  sympathy,  there  is  solidarity  between  all  the  interests  of 
all  the  people  of  the  world  who  work  together.  We  have  against 
us  nothing  but  idle  and  bad  people,  but  people  like  you  must 
agree  or  you  will  never,  my  dear  friends,  accomplish  anything. 
You  must  then  join  this  International  Conciliation  Association. 
I personally  disappear  in  that;  I am  and  I want  to  be  nothing. 
I found  in  America  the  good,  the  very  good,  the  soundest  people 
have  joined  the  American  Branch  of  the  International  Concilia- 
tion Association.  The  Honorary  President  is  Andrew  D.  White, 
my  old  and  honorable  friend  of  The  Hague,  who  has  also  been 
Ambassador  at  Berlin  (applause),  and  he  is  certainly  one  of  the 
most  respected  men  I have  ever  met.  The  other  man  is  the 
President  of  this  Congress,  Andrew  Carnegie.  I have  nothing 
to  say  of  him  after  all  you  have  seen  and  heard  these  days ; then 
there  is  the  effective  President,  Dr.  Nicholas  Murray  Butler 
of  Columbia  University.  (Applause.)  Then  I see  that  we  have 
Mr.  Straus,  my  friend  here,  if  he  will  allow  me  to  name  him. 
We  have  practical  men,  and  among  them  I think  Mr.  Straus  is 
a very  good  example.  Mr.  Straus  is  one  of  the  honorary  mem- 
bers of  the  committee,  so  is  Mr.  Elihu  Root,  and  Mr.  John  Hay 
was  another.  (Applause.)  We  have,  I assure  you,  the  most 
disinterested  men  you  can  find  in  America.  If  you  will  kindly 
apply  to  President  Nicholas  Murray  Butler,  he  will  send  you 


133 

all  the  information  about  this  Association,  and  you  will  find  no 
better  way  of  coming  to  an  understanding  with  people  of  this 
same  mind  in  all  the  countries  of  Europe.  When  we  are  all  in 
touch,  all  in  good  relations,  we  may  be  sure  there  can  be  no  mis- 
understanding, that  international  conflicts  will  be  more  and  more 
rare,  and  that  you  will  have  done  a great  deal  to  prevent  them. 

Now,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  I have  finished ; but  I shall  not 
be  satisfied  if  I do  not  express  to  you  as  well  as  I can — I do  not 
mean  in  an  eloquent  way,  but  I mean  as  sincerely  as  I possibly 
can — how  happy  I am  to  have  seen  you.  I am  very  happy  to 
have  the  feeling — I think  I am  not  deceived  in  having  the 
feeling — that  we  quite  agree;  that  you  understand  perfectly  that 
my  journey,  although  the  crossing  was  very  bad  (laughter),  was 
not  useless.  When  I return  to  France  I shall  be  with  my  family 
and  with  my  friends,  and  when  they  reproach  me  for  being 
always  away  from  home,  I shall  tell  them  it  is  true;  I am 
very  often  absent;  I am  very  often  far  from  my  country,  but 
I think  I have  been  doing  a good  work;  and  I thank  you,  ladies 
and  gentlemen,  for  having  given  me  that  good  feeling.  (Great 
applause.) 

Mr.  Marks  : 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : This  meeting  of  commerce  and 
industry  is  to  be  congratulated,  because  we  have  here  to-day  a 
cabinet  officer,  a representative  of  our  government  from  the 
Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor.  It  would  be  presumptuous 
on  my  part  to  introduce  this  gentleman  to  you,  because  he  is  so 
well  known  to  every  American  audience.  I present  the  Hon. 
Oscar  S.  Straus.  (Great  applause.) 

(As  Mr.  Straus  came  forward  to  address  the  meeting,  Baron 
d’Estournelles  arose.) 

Baron  d'Estournelles  : 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  Allow  me  to  tell  you  one  thing 
that  I was  telling  my  friend,  Mr.  Straus.  I was  telling  him  that 
you  were  really  a very  hurrying  nation.  You  think  that  my  par- 
ticipation in  the  program  is  finished  now  and  that  there  remains 
to  me  only  the  pleasure  of  listening  to  Mr.  Straus.  No,  no;  it 
is  not  that  way.  The  committee  has  told  me  that  I was  to  speak 
here  at  three,  that  very  likely  I should  be  free  at  four,  and  that 
then  an  automobile  would  wait  for  me  at  the  door  (laughter) 


134 

and  take  me  to  another  place,  where  I am  to  address  a meeting. 
(Laughter.)  That  other  meeting  is  a very  important  one.  I shall 
not  address  there  business  men,  I shall  not  address  ladies  and 
gentlemen,  but  there  I shall  address  thousands  and  thousands  of 
children.  (Applause.)  These  American  children  will  be  the 
business  men  and  women  of  to-morrow.  They  will  have  to  fol- 
low your  work,  which  you  understand  so  well,  and  therefore 
I am  not  able  to  remain  and  have  the  pleasure  of  listening  to 
Mr.  Straus,  but  will  go  right  to  the  children  now.  (Great  ap- 
plause.) 

Mr.  Straus  : I will  keep  Baron  d’Estournelles  here  for  just 
a minute  or  two. 

Baron  d’Estournelles  : Quite  right. 

Mr.  Straus  : And  then  he  can  go  to  the  children,  but  I want 
to  tell  an  incident — 

Baron  d’Estournelles  : Good ! 

Mr.  Straus: — with  which  his  name  is  connected.  Shortly 
after  the  last  election,  or  shortly  after  the  President  succeeded  to 
the  Presidency,  Baron  d’Estournelles  stated  that  he  feared  this 
country,  having  advanced  to  the  forefront  as  a commercial  nation, 
would  be  led  by  the  President  into  the  way  of  commercialism. 
Shortly  afterward,  when  the  President  directed  the  Venezuelan 
affair  to  the  Hague  Tribunal,  having  declined  to  accept  the  offer 
of  the  German  Emperor  to  arbitrate  the  matter,  referred  it,  as  the 
Baron  has  described  to  you,  the  Baron  made  a speech  in  the 
French  Senate — of  which  he  is  one  of  the  most  distinguished 
members — and  stated  that  he  had  feared  that  the  United  States, 
which  had  reached  such  a high  point  in  its  commercial  develop- 
ment and  had  placed  in  its  executive  chair  a man  who  was  feared 
by  many,  would  be  a powerful  instrument  for  war;  but  that  he 
felt  now  he  had  not  only  to  apologize  to  the  United  States  but 
to  proclaim  to  the  world  that  the  United  States,  with  President 
Roosevelt  at  its  head,  had  taken  the  moral  leadership  of  the 
enlightened  nations  of  the  world.  (Great  applause.)  The  Baron 
says  “quite  true.”  I know  it  was  true,  I clipped  his  statements 
at  the  time  from  a French  newspaper,  and  I showed  it  to  Presi- 
dent Roosevelt.  (Laughter.)  I will  now  let  the  Baron  de  Con- 


135 

stant  go,  if  he  wants  to.  (Laughter.)  But  I wish  to  say — I 
am  not  going  to  make  a long  speech,  I made  a long  speech  last 
night — 

Baron  d’Estournelles  : No,  not  long. 

Mr.  Straus  : I am  going  to  say  only  a few  words  to-day, 
because  there  are  a number  of  eminent  speakers  here,  and  some 
from  abroad,  and  I wish  to  give  them  the  time,  because  you 
know  I am  naturally  a peace  man,  being  the  head  of  a depart- 
ment of  the  government  that  only  can  thrive  in  times  of  peace. 
(Applause.) 

For  many  years  there  has  been,  and  even  now  there  is  a 
kind  of  shibboleth  among  the  nations,  created  by  a false  philos- 
ophy, which  is  embraced  in  the  statement  that  “trade  follows  the 
flag.”  In  other  words,  the  more  lands  you  have  conquered,  the 
more  wars  you  have  fought,  the  larger  your  trade.  I know 
of  only  one  trade  that  follows  the  flag  of  war,  and  it  is  the  trade 
of  the  grave-digger.  (Applause.) 

Commerce  follows  along  the  highways  of  least  resistance — 
commerce  is  not  extended  by  the  cannon’s  mouth ; on  the  con- 
trary, times  have  changed  with  the  expansion  of  commerce.  As 
the  nations  have  been  brought  nearer  and  nearer  together  by 
the  rapidity  of  intercommunication,  the  foreign  commerce  of  the 
world  has  within  the  last  forty  years  taken  wonderful  leaps  and 
bounds,  and  the  old  idea  has  disappeared  that  one  nation  is 
interested  in  the  weakened  condition  of  other  nations.  The  idea 
obtained  for  thousands  of  years,  and  obtains  yet,  in  some  parts 
of  the  world,  that  as  a neighboring  nation  gets  weaker  and 
poorer,  the  other  nations  grow  greater  and  more  prosperous. 
The  growth  of  commerce  has  developed  the  absolute  fallacy  of 
that  conclusion.  Commerce  is  reciprocal,  based  not  upon  enmity 
but  on  fair  exchange,  on  mutuality. 

Baron  d’Estournelles:  Good.  (Applause.) 

Mr.  Straus  : Absolute  mutuality.  The  richer  the  surround- 
ing nations,  the  better  it  is  for  the  other  nations,  because  they 
have  commodities  to  exchange,  and  have  money  to  pay  for  those 
commodities ; consequently  the  welfare  of  nations  is  absolutely 
bound  together,  and  each  nation  is  interested  in  the  progress, 
happiness  and  welfare  of  the  other ; that  is  one  of  the  chief  com- 
mercial aspects  of  the  subject  of  International  Peace. 

More  than  that,  has  it  ever  occurred  to  you,  looking  entirely 


136 

at  the  material  side,  that  after  every  great  war  has  followed  a 
terrible  panic?  After  the  Crimean  War  in  ’56  came  the  dreadful 
panic  of  1857  m Europe  and  in  this  country.  After  the  Franco- 
German  War  of  1870  followed  the  dreadful  panic  of  1873 ; and  so 
you  will  find,  going  farther  back,  that  from  this  terrible  con- 
dition of  war  and  the  dislocation  of  all  of  the  peaceful  avocations 
of  the  people,  comes  a dreadful  period  of  commercial  depression, 
which  sometimes  brings  within  its  train  almost  as  much  disaster 
as  the  war  itself. 

The  people  in  civilized  countries  are  pretty  well  agreed  as 
to  what  is  right  and  what  is  wrong;  we  are  pretty  well  agreed 
as  to  moral  standards  and  fundamental  principles.  We  know  we 
have  no  right  to  steal  our  neighbor’s  goods ; we  know  we  have 
no  right  to  shoot  down  our  debtors ; we  know  we  have  no  right, 
with  sword  and  pistol,  to  pursue  a man  because  he  happens  to 
owe  us  something,  or  from  whom  we  claim  an  obligation.  Now, 
is  there  any  reason  in  the  world  that  you  can  imagine  why  a 
different  standard  or  basis  of  morality  should  exist  between  a 
conglomeration  of  individuals  forming  a nation  and  another  con- 
glomeration of  people  constituting  another  nation,  than  should 
exist  between  the  people  or  the  subjects  within  the  limits  of 
each  separate  nation? 

As  I explained  a little  more  fully  last  night,  because  of  the 
sophisms,  the  pettifogisms,  the  perversion  of  ideas  of  right, 
drawn  from  precedents  based  upon  might  instead  of  right,  the 
present  state  of  international  law,  as  it  is  found  in  all  the  leading 
text-writers,  is  this : to  nations  at  war,  whom  we  call  belligerents, 
neutral  nations  have  no  right  to  sell  armaments  or  munitions  of 
war,  but  it  is  lawful  for  the  subjects  of  these  neutral  nations  to 
sell  such  armaments  and  munitions.  Neutral  nations  have  no 
right,  as  such,  to  lend  money  to  the  belligerent  nations,  and  money 
to-day  is  the  greatest  war-making  power  in  the  world.  Every- 
thing can  be  purchased,  the  most  destructive  machinery  of  war; 
it  is  simply  a question  of  money.  Whereas  neutral  nations  under 
the  law  of  nations  are  not  permitted  to  lend  the  belligerent 
nations  money,  yet  the  bankers  of  a neutral  nation  are  per- 
mitted to  do  it  under  their  law.  Isn’t  that  a travesty,  a per- 
version and  a sophism?  (Applause.) 

Now,  my  dear  colleague,  Baron  d’Estournelles,  if  you  do  not 
succeed — and  I do  not  think  you  will  succeed — in  coming  to  an 


137 

agreement  at  the  next  Hague  Conference,  of  which  you  are  one 
of  the  most  distinguished  delegates,  if  you  do  not  succeed  in 
coming  to  an  agreement  on  the  question  of  the  limitation  of 
armaments,  I beg  of  you  have  the  Hague  Treaty  amended,  so 
that  the  lending  of  money  to  any  nation  either  about  to  go  to 
war  or  in  war  shall  be  regarded  and  by  international  consent 
pronounced  as  an  unfriendly  and  hostile  act.  (Applause.) 

(At  this  point  Baron  d’Estournelles  shook  hands  with  Mr. 
Straus  and  left  the  meeting.) 

Ladies  and  gentlemen,  there  are  many  other  phases  of  this 
subject  that  I should  like  to  touch  upon,  but  I must  deny  myself 
the  privilege,  as  I do  not  wish  to  encroach  upon  the  time  of 
the  distinguished  gentlemen  who  are  to  follow  me.  I thank 
you  very  much.  (Great  applause.) 

Mr.  Marks  : 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : Before  introducing  the  next 
speaker,  I should  like  to  read  a resolution  which  has  been  passed 
to  me  by  one  of  the  delegates  (reading)  : 

“Whereas,  the  merchants,  manufacturers  and  farmers  of 
America  appreciate  very  keenly  the  importance  of  substituting  a 
system  of  law  and  order  in  place  of  war  in  the  settlement  of 
international  differences ; 

“Therefore,  be  it  resolved,  That  we  heartily  endorse  the 
sentiments  and  aims  of  the  Peace  Congress ; 

“Resolved,  That  we  recommend  the  establishment  of  a 
National  Peace  Society  in  this  country  for  the  purposes  of  con- 
ciliation, mediation  and  arbitration,  and  authorize  the  Chairman 
of  this  meeting  to  give  assurance  to  the  executive  committee 
of  the  Peace  Congress  of  our  co-operation  in  the  establishment 
and  maintenance  of  such  an  organization.” 

With  your  consent  I will  refer  this  to  the  executive 
committee  of  the  Peace  Congress. 

We  have  here  with  us  this  afternoon,  ladies  and  gentlemen, 
the  president  of  the  largest  and  most  influential  association  of 
manufacturers  in  the  United  States.  That  means  a great  deal 
at  a meeting  of  commerce  and  industry,  and  I take  pleasure  in 
introducing  to  you  Mr.  James  W.  Van  Cleave,  President  of  the 
National  Association  of  Manufacturers.  (Applause.) 


138 

The  Importance  of  Peace  to  Industry 

James  W.  Van  Cleave. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : Following-,  as 
I am,  such  men  of  distinction  and  representing,  as  I seem  to  do, 
by  being  the  only  manufacturer  here,  such  a body  of  men  as  the 
manufacturers  of  America,  it  seems  that  I may  be  pardoned,  at 
least  I hope  that  I may  be  pardoned,  if  I use  my  manuscript. 

As  a representative  of  the  manufacturing  industries  of  the 
United  States  I am  proud  of  the  invitation  which  has  been  ex- 
tended to  me  to  address  the  eminent  men  from  all  over  the  world 
who  are  gathered  here  to  devise  means  to  promote  the  cause  of 
International  Peace.  It  is1  hardly  necessary  for  me  to  say  that 
I am  heartily  in  accord  with  the  object  of  this  assemblage.  We 
manufacturers  are  interested  in  World  Peace  both  as  humani- 
tarians and  as  business  men.  On  the  latter  phase  of  our  interest 
I will  say  a few  words  to  you  to-day. 

Stated  in  terms  of  money,  this  interest  can  be  shown  to  be 
large.  In  the  aggregate  the  manufactures  of  the  United  States 
far  exceed  those  of  any  other  two  countries.  Our  production 
of  pig  iron  in  1906  equaled  that  of  Great  Britain,  Germany  and 
France  together,  and  these  are  our  nearest  competitors.  If  there 
be  any  virtue,  therefore,  in  the  multiplication  methods  of  apprais- 
ing things,  the  interest  of  the  American  manufacturers  in  this 
vast  issue  is  large. 

At  this  hour  a capital  of  $14,000,000,000  is  invested  in  the 
mills  and  factories'  of  the  United  States,  and  these  employ  over 
3,500,000  persons,  who  will  receive  $4,000,000,000  in  wages  for 
this  year.  The  finished  products  of  these  factories  will,  for  1907, 
amount  to  over  $16,000,000,000.  This  stupendous  sum,  which 
is  too  large  for  us  to  adequately  interpret  in  comprehensible 
terms,  is  as  great  as  the  value  of  the  entire  property,  real  and 
personal,  of  the  United  States  in  i860,  at  the  time  of  Lincoln’s 
first  election.  It  is  as  large  as  the  value  of  all  the  property  of 
Spain  in  these  prosperous  days  of  Alfonso  XIII. 

Moreover,  much  of  this  vast  total  depends  for  its  existence 
on  the  maintenance  of  our  commerce  with  the  world,  for  in  1906 
we  exported  over  $700,000,000  in  manufactures.  In  our  sales  of 
manufactures  abroad  we  rank  next  to  Great  Britain  and  Germany. 

Now,  I am  not  saying  that  the  pocket  interest  in  anything  is 


139 

the  largest  that  civilized  man  can  have.  There  are  moral  con- 
siderations which  make  a stronger  appeal  to  us  to  work  for  Peace 
than  can  be  expressed  in  terms  of  pounds,  francs,  marks  or  dol- 
lars. Other  speakers  at  the  sessions  of  this  assemblage,  how- 
ever, have  already  dealt  on  the  ethical  side  of  the  Peace  ques- 
tion, and  have  done  it  more  adequately  than  I could  do  it.  And, 
as  I understand,  others  are  still  to  speak  on  that  side.  I shall 
therefore  confine  myself  to  the  strictly  business  phase  of  the 
subject. 

Many  persons  think  that  war  promotes  commerce,  and  that 
thus  it  aids  farmers,  manufacturers  and  all  sorts  of  producers. 
But  this  is  true  only  for  the  moment.  The  Russo-Japanese  war 
increased  America’s  sales  to  Japan,  Russia  and  China  while  the 
war  was  going  on,  but  it  decreased  those  sales  immediately  after- 
ward. To  the  extent  of  the  drain  made  upon  their  resources  by 
the  war  those  countries  will  have  to  economize  for  a few  years. 
Their  purchases  from  the  outside  world  will  be  smaller. 

To  an  immeasurably  greater  extent  than  ever  before  the 
world  has  become  one  great  family.  International  commerce 
has  had  a very  large  place  in  promoting  this  solidarity.  In  one 
degree  or  another  whatever  aids  one  country  benefits  all  the  rest. 
Disaster,  too,  is  universal  in  its  consequences.  Most  of  us  who 
are  here  to-day,  no  matter  which  side  of  the  Atlantic  or  which 
side  of  the  Pacific  we  hail  from,  remember  the  fall  of  the  great 
London  financial  and  commercial  house  of  Baring  Brothers  in 
1890.  The  crash  was  heard  around  the  world.  It  helped  to 
start  the  trade  dislocation  which,  in  the  next  few  years,  striking 
every  country  successively,  circled  the  globe. 

In  the  financial  flurry  two  or  three  weeks  ago  the  drop  one 
morning  on  the  Berlin  bourse  registered  itself  instantaneously  in 
the  London  market,  and  it  immediately  sent  prices  down  on  the 
New  York  Stock  Exchange.  To-day  famine  in  large  districts  of 
Russia  and  China  deprives  the  United  States,  England,  Germany 
and  every  other  commercial  country  of  many  patrons,  just  as 
last  year’s  famine  in  part  of  Japan  did.  Cain’s  query,  Am  I my 
brother’s  keeper?  cannot  be  answered  to-day  as  Cain  would  have 
answered  it.  To  a certain  degree  the  humanitarian  spirit  of  this 
age  makes  every  man  his  brother’s  keeper. 

As  I said  a moment  ago,  the  war  between  Japan  and  Russia, 
while  it  lasted  helped  our  trade  with  those  countries,  and  also 


140 

with  China,  in  part  of  whose  territory  the  war  was  waged.  But 
it  retarded  trade  afterward.  It  killed  hundreds  of  thousands  of 
men,  and  it  impoverished  millions.  All  of  us  manufacturers  thus 
lost  many  patrons.  Dead  men  buy  no  clothes.  Paupers  cannot 
pay  for  any. 

In  the  ancient  world  rivers,  mountains,  deserts  and  seas  sep- 
arated peoples.  Separations  made  them  strangers  to  each  other, 
and,  as  strangers,  they  became  enemies.  Steam  and  electricity 
have  changed  all  this.  The  railroads  have  blotted  out  the  moun- 
tains, the  rivers  and  the  deserts.  The  steamers  have  abolished 
the  oceans.  With  their  cargoes  of  merchandise  and  passengers, 
the  railroads  and  the  steamboats,  aided  by  the  marine  and  the 
land  telegraphs,  have  made  all  the  world’s  peoples  speak  a com- 
mon tongue,  and  have  brought  the  four  corners  of  the  globe  into 
close  proximity. 

International  commerce  is  the  greatest  promoter  of  Interna- 
tional Peace  that  any  of  us  can  name.  If  Swift  was  right  when 
he  said  that  the  man  who  made  two  blades  of  grass  grow  where 
only  one  grew  before  deserved  better  of  mankind  than  did  the 
whole  race  of  politicians,  doubly  blest  must  be  the  man  or  the 
nation  that  puts  two  lines  of  steamers  on  the  ocean  or  builds  two 
lines  of  railway  across  international  frontiers  where  only  one  ex- 
isted previously.  The  lines  which  carry  passengers  and  com- 
modities between  Paris  and  Berlin  are  doing  more  to  maintain 
harmony  between  France  and  Germany  than  are  all  the  Peace 
Societies  of  the  two  countries. 

Dr.  Lardner,  a very  wise  man  who  was  still  alive  when 
many  of  us  who  are  here  to-day  were  boys,  predicted  that,  as  a 
commercial  proposition,  it  would  be  forever  impossible  to  build 
boats  which  would  cross  the  Atlantic  by  steam.  No  boat,  he  said, 
could  carry  enough  coal  to  make  steam  for  those  3,000  miles  of 
transit.  And  he  proved  it,  too,  to  the  satisfaction  of  many  per- 
sons, wise  and  unwise,  for  he  was  very  handy  with  figures. 

Before  Dr.  Lardner  died,  a little  less  than  half  a century 
ago,  the  Cunard,  Collins,  Inman,  Allen,  Hamburg-American  and 
other  lines  of  steamers  crossed  the  Atlantic  in  the  regular  trade 
between  England  and  other  European  countries  and  the  United 
States.  Steamboats,  too,  were  running  on  the  Pacific.  Four  or 
five  years  before  Dr.  Lardner  died,  his  country,  Great  Britain, 
sent  a merchant  steamer  all  around  the  globe,  making  the  circuit 


141 

that  Magellan,  Drake  and  Cook  made  long  before  his  time,  and 
making  it  not  only  far  quicker,  but  in  far  greater  safety  and 
comfort  for  its  crew. 

Lowell’s  injunction  is  something  which  all  of  us  should  keep 
constantly  in  mind.  We  must  never  prophecy  unless  we  know. 
Steamboats  are  now  making  the  Atlantic  trip  almost  as  familiar 
and  nearly  as  safe  as  that  from  New  York  to  Brooklyn  or  to 
Jersey  City.  The  voyage  by  sailing  vessels  from  England  to  the 
United  States  which  took  several  weeks  of  time  when  George  II. 
was  king,  can  be  made  in  the  same  number  of  days  by  steamer 
in  his  great  grandson,  Edward  VII. ’s  age. 

And  the  improved  relations  which  have  been  established 
between  the  two  countries  are  largely  due  to  the  shortening  and 
the  cheapening  of  the  time  distance  between  them,  and  the  con- 
sequent expansion  in  the  commerce  which  passes  from  one  to 
the  other.  To  a certain  extent  all  international  trade  is  recipro- 
cal. Each  country  buys  from  its  neighbors  as  well  as  sells  to 
them.  And  the  more  buying  and  selling  which  is  transacted 
between  them,  the  better  friends  they  become,  and  the  greater  the 
stake  which  they  have  in  maintaining  peace  with  each  other. 
For  selfish  as  well  as  for  humanitarian  reasons  each  is  interested 
in  the  other’s  welfare.  Each  figuratively  greets  the  other  with 
Rip  Van  Winkle’s  salutation,  “May  you  live  long  and  prosper.” 

Speaking  for  men  of  my  own  guild,  I say  that  we  have  an 
especial  incentive  to  work  for  the  maintenance  of  amicable  rela- 
tions with  all  countries.  More  and  more  every  year  the  products 
of  America’s  factories  outrun  the  demands  of  America’s  con- 
sumers. To  a constantly  increasing  degree  we  are  under  the 
necessity  of  looking  for  new  and  broader  markets  in  England, 
Germany,  France,  China,  Japan  and  every  other  land.  It  is  only 
by  the  preservation  of  Peace  that  we  can  get  these  markets,  or 
hold  them  when  we  do  get  them. 

For  this  as  well  as  for  many  other  reasons,  as  I look  around 
this  hall  to-day  I greet  every  man  in  it  as  a kinsman,  regardless 
of  the  language  which  he  speaks  or  the  color  of  his  skin.  The 
Russian,  the  Japanese,  the  Englishman,  the  German,  the  French- 
man, the  Mexican  and  everybody  within  sound  of  my  voice  I hail 
as  a brother,  in  whose  life  and  welfare  I have  an  interest.  Each 
produces  something  that  we  manufacturers  want  to  buy.  Each 
asks  for  something  that  we  have  to  sell. 


142 

But  we  Americans  cannot  work  effectively  for  harmony 
between  the  nations  until  we  get  peace  at  home.  We  must  have 
Industrial  Peace  like  that  for  which  the  Citizens’  Industrial  Asso- 
ciation, of  which  I have  the  honor  to  be  one  of  the  founders,  has 
been  working  with  such  success  for  years.  We  want  Peace  like 
that  which  President  Roosevelt’s  commission,  just  formed,  which 
had  its  origin  in  the  Nobel  prize,  seeks  to  establish.  Harmony 
between  employers  in  all  callings  and  between  employers  and 
workers,  is  one  of  the  things  which  we  aim  to  bring  about.  We 
must  have  peace  between  the  great  political  parties  by  abolishing 
the  demagogues  in  each  of  them,  and  by  keeping  them  clean 
Then  when  we  speak  in  behalf  of  peace  for  all  nations  we  will  be 
speaking  with  the  voice  of  85,000,000  of  people,  representing  the 
most  populous  country  in  the  world  except  China  and  Russia,  a 
country  which  has  without  exception  as  much  wealth  as  any  two 
nations  in  the  world  combined. 

American  manufacturers  have  an  especial  reason  to  work 
for  an  arbitration  board  to  settle  international  controversies.  The 
arbitration,  however,  must  be  based  on  justice.  We  want  some 
tribunal  in  which  the  leading  nations  of  the  world  are  represented ; 
one  that  will  consider  and  adjust  peaceably  issues  in  dispute 
between  countries.  A court  which  represents  the  public  sentiment 
of  the  world,  reinforced  if  necessary  by  the  armies  and  the  navies 
of  the  great  nations,  will  command  respect.  But  in  order  to  bring 
the  right  sort  of  a settlement — and  this  is  the  only  kind  of  a settle- 
ment which  will  stay  settled — the  Peace  Tribunal’s  rulings  must 
be  based  on  the  elemental  and  eternal  principles  of  justice,  which 
appeal  to  all  men. 

While  no  man  in  this  great  assemblage  would  rejoice  more 
sincerely  than  I would  at  the  establishment  of  Universal  and 
Eternal  Peace,  I am  compelled  by  circumstances  to  say  that  the 
United  States  cannot  safely  lose  sight  of  Cromwell’s  injunction 
to  “keep  your  powder  dry.”  Great  Britain,  Spain  and  the  United 
States  are  to  propose,  in  the  Hague  Peace  Conference  in  June,  a 
limitation  of  the  armaments  of  the  nations.  Russia,  Germany  and 
Austria  have  given  notice  that  they  will  oppose  this  proposition. 
This  means  that  many  years  must  pass  before  the  nations  disband 
their  armies  and  navies,  or  place  any  restriction  on  their  expan- 
sion. Tennyson’s  “parliament  of  man  and  federation  of  the 
world”  will  not  come  in  the  lifetime  of  anybody  in  this  hall.  I 


H3 

wish  it  were  here  in  1907,  or  that  we  could  be  assured  of  getting 
it  in  1917  or  1927,  but  as  practical  men  we  must  pay  a decent 
regard  to  the  conditions  which  confront  us. 

“To  be  prepared  for  war  is  one  of  the  most  effectual  means 
of  preserving  peace.”  These  were  the  words  of  a man  who  was 
first  in  Peace  as  well  as  first  in  war.  They  were  the  words  of  a 
lover  of  the  entire  human  race — George  Washington.  And,  hap- 
pily, they  are  just  as  applicable  to  the  America  of  to-day  as  they 
were  to  the  America  to  which  they  were  directed. 

The  United  States  must  be  friendly  to  all  races  and  all 
peoples.  It  must  meet  all  its  obligations  as  a member  of  the  fam- 
ily of  nations.  When  disagreements  arise,  if  they  ever  do  arise, 
between  us  and  any  other  nation,  we  must  so  order  our  conduct 
that  it  will  appeal  to  the  world’s  sense  of  fairness  and  justice. 
We  shall  then  be  able  to  submit  our  claims  to  any  intelligent  and 
impartial  tribunal  with  the  faith  that  our  position  will  command 
the  world’s  approval. 

But  suppose  that,  even  with  the  right  on  our  side,  justice  is 
denied  to  us.  What  then?  Then  we  must  accept  Davy  Crockett’s 
doctrine.  Being  sure  that  we  are  right,  we  must  go  ahead. 

There  are  some  issues — issues  of  honor,  of  principle,  of 
national  safety — which  cannot  consistently  be  referred  to  any 
international  tribunal.  What  would  have  happened  if  we  had 
submitted  to  arbitration  that  hands-off-the-American-continent 
warning  which  Monroe  in  1823  directed  against  the  Holy  Alli- 
ance, which  intended  to  subjugate  the  little  countries  to  the  south 
of  us  that  had  just  broken  aw’ay  from  Spain?  If  we  had  pre- 
sented our  case  to  any  International  Tribunal  which  could  have 
been  set  up  in  that  day,  we  would  have  been  thrown  out  of  court. 
The  whole  European  world,  except  England,  would  have  been 
against  us.  Europe  was  the  only  part  of  the  world  which  was  on 
the  map  in  that  day,  except  the  United  States,  and  there  were 
many  rulers  who  thought  that  the  contour  of  the  world’s  map 
would  be  improved  if  the  United  States  were  removed  from  it. 

The  world  of  1823  would  have  told  us  that  those  little 
mongrel  countries  of  Central  and  South  America  would  have  been 
better  taken  care  of  if  they  had  remained  under  Spain’s’  control 
than  if  they  were  left  to  manage  their  own  affairs.  The  arbi- 
trators could  easily  have  shown  that  Spain  was  a leader  in  the 
world’s  civilization,  with  many  centuries  of  history  behind  her, 


144 

even  before  she  sent  Columbus  over  here  to  discover  a continent 
peopled  by  a few  million  savages,  all  of  whom  were  half-naked 
except  those  who  were  wholly  naked.  It  would  not  have  been 
hard  for  any  arbitrators  of  four-fifths  of  a century  ago  to  prove  to 
their  own  satisfaction  that  any  one  of  the  members  of  the  Holy 
Alliance — Alexander  of  Russia,  Louis  XVIII  of  France,  Freder- 
ick William  of  Prussia,  or  Francis  of  Austria — knew  better  what 
was  good  for  Mexico,  Bolivia,  Chili  and  their  neighbors  than  did 
those  countries’  Presidents  or  people. 

Yet,  the  Monroe  policy  must  be  applauded  by  the  assemblage 
of  Peace  Promoters  which  I am  addressing.  It  was  one  of  the 
longest  steps  in  the  direction  of  Universal  Peace  which  the  world 
has  ever  seen.  It  removed  one-half,  of  the  globe  from  the  clash- 
ing ambitions  and  jealousies  of  the  Old  World’s  sovereigns  and 
politicians.  By  preventing  the  partitioning  of  the  American  con- 
tinent among  the  nations  of  Europe  it  has  headed  off  such  conflicts 
as  that  of  1904-05  between  a European  and  an  Asiatic  nation  for 
supremacy  in  one  great  region  of  Asia.  It  has  also  averted  such 
wars  as  that  of  a few  years  ago  between  England  and  the  two 
little  Boer  republics  in  Africa,  a war  which  subverted  those 
republics. 

Translated  into  concrete  phrase  the  Monroe  doctrine  means 
that  Americans  must  be  allowed  to  rule  America.  The  rule  that 
some  of  those  countries  is  putting  up  is  crude,  but  it  is  home  rule, 
and  it  is  improving.  This  rule  carries  the  trademark,  “Made  in 
America.”  Zelaya  of  Nicaragua  in  1907  may  be  more  tyrannical 
than  was  the  Yankee  pirate,  William  Walker,  who  ruled  Nica- 
ragua in  1857,  but  he  is  a home-made  product,  and  so  long  as 
his  own  people  can  stand  his  rule,  the  rest  of  the  world,  including 
the  United  States,  must  let  them  have  it. 

Under  the  Monroe  policy  the  world  sees  a Mexico,  a Brazil, 
a Chili,  an  Argentina  and  a Peru  which  compare  favorably  with 
the  progressive  and  enlightened  people  of  the  rest  of  the  globe. 
As  a result  of  this  policy  there  are  twenty  republics  in  the  West- 
ern Hemisphere  now  as  compared  with  one  a century  ago.  And 
if  this  continent  had  been  left  open  to  spoliation  by  Europe’s 
sovereigns,  it  is  not  at  all  certain  that  this  one  republic  would  be 
here  now.  If  here,  it  would  have  immeasurably  less  influence  in 
the  world’s  affairs  than  it  exerts  to-day. 

I sincerely  hope  that  this  assemblage  of  Peacemakers  from  all 


145 

the  continents  will  be  able  to  wield  an  influence  in  their  respective 
countries  which  will  make  wars  as  few  in  the  Old  World  as  they 
have  been  in  the  New,  and  that  it  will  create  a sentiment  that  will 
eventually  abolish  wars  in  the  New  World  and  the  Old. 

There  is  an  especial  propriety  in  holding  this  Peace  Confer- 
ence in  a city  which  has  more  races  and  languages  in  its  make-up 
than  are  found  even  in  London  or  Constantinople.  To  us  Ameri- 
cans, who  are  composed  of  a blend  of  all  the  peoples  of  the  earth, 
every  Peace  Movement  makes  a particularly  powerful  appeal. 
War  by  us  against  any  nation  would  be  a war  between  brothers 
united  by  the  tie  of  a common  humanity. 

Floating  this  afternoon  in  this  harbor  and  around  this  hall 
are  the  flags  of  nearly  every  country  under  the  sun.  I hail  all 
these  flags  as  flags  of  Peace,  messengers  from  peoples  with  whom 
I hope  my  own  country  will  remain  on  the  warmest  terms  of 
friendship  forever. 

Mr.  Marks 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  There  was  quite  a little  war 
philosophy  in  the  last  peace  talk  (laughter),  but  Peace  Con- 
gresses must  learn  to  listen  and  to  argue,  patiently  and  quietly. 
You  cannot  force  Peace.  You  have  got  to  get  at  it  by  discussion. 
(Applause.)  Last  night  a gentleman  made  a remark  which  I 
would  like  to  quote  as  a complete  answer  to  one  of  the  statements 
Mr.  Van  Cleave  made:  “The  world  is  better  to-day  than  it  was 
yesterday,  and  we  all  feel  that  it  is  going  to  be  better  to-morrow 
than  it  is  to-day.”  (Applause.) 

The  next  speaker,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  is  a Vice-President 
of  the  National  Civic  Federation.  He  is  ex-Governor  of  the  State 
of  New  Hampshire,  and  Master  of  a great  farmers’  organization 
called  the  National  Grange.  It  gives  me  pleasure  to  introduce 
to  you  Hon.  N.  J.  Bachelder.  (Applause.) 

Agriculture  and  the  Peace  Movement 

Hon.  Nahum  J.  Bachelder 

I am  from  a section  of  the  country  typical  of  Peace.  The 
first  white  settlers  to  land  at  Plymouth  Rock,  upon  the  rough 
New  England  coast,  had  left  their  mother  country  to  avoid  con- 
flict, and  braved  the  dangers  of  the  broad  ocean  upon  a peaceful 
errand.  They  encountered  the  hardships  imposed  by  climate  and 


146 

the  danger  of  the  crafty  redman,  to  maintain  the  right  to  worship 
God  according  to  the  dictates  of  conscience,  manifesting  perhaps 
greater  bravery  than  would  be  required  upon  the  battlefield. 
Those  early  settlers  established  no  armies  and  constructed  no  bat- 
tleships, but  quietly  followed  the  peaceful  avocations  of  tilling  the 
soil  and  establishing  a race  of  peace-loving  people.  When  the 
oppression  of  the  mother  country  reached  them,  even  there  they 
simply  pitched  the  old  lady’s  tea  into  Boston  harbor  and  quietly 
returned  to  their  flocks  and  herds.  From  then  till  now  New 
England  has  been  exceptionally  free  from  bloody  war,  as  well 
as  from  industrial  strife,  although  her  people  are  always  ready 
to  respond  in  defense  of  the  country  and  the  old  flag. 

In  1905  the  great  nations  of  Russia  and  Japan,  having 
destroyed  thousands  of  human  lives  and  billions  of  dollars’  worth 
of  property  in  cruel  war,  cast  their  eyes  over  the  entire  world  for 
a place  in  which  to  come  to  an  amicable  agreement.  Finally,  their 
representatives  met  upon  the  peaceful  shores  of  New  England, 
close  by  where  the  Pilgrims  landed  a few  centuries  before,  and 
there  entered  into  a Treaty  of  Peace  that  will  go  down  in  history 
as  one  of  the  greatest  peace  movements  the  world  ever  knew. 
It  is  a matter  of  profound  regret  that  they  did  not  meet  upon  this 
mission  of  peace  before,  rather  than  after,  the  bloody  conflict. 
For  these  and  other  reasons  I am  justified  in  saying  that  I am 
from  a section  of  our  country  typical  of  Peace. 

I am  here,  however,  not  to  represent  this,  or  any  other  section 
of  the  country,  but  to  represent  the  great  industry  of  agriculture 
and  those  engaged  in  it.  I believe  the  interests  of  agriculture  are 
the  most  important  of  any  represented  in  this  movement  for  Uni- 
versal Peace,  for  the  husbandman  is  the  most  important  factor 
among  the  industrial  classes.  When  the  products  of  his  labor  are 
reduced,  the  fires  in  our  great  furnaces  burn  lower,  the  spindles 
in  our  great  factories  turn  with  less  rapidity,  the  trains  upon  our 
railroads  run  with  less  frequency,  and  the  goods  upon  the  shelves 
of  our  great  mercantile  houses  begin  to  gather  dust.  When  the 
farms  of  the  country  yield  abundant  crops,  as  they  have  in  recent 
years,  abandoned  forges  are  kindled  anew,  manufacturers  are 
unable  to  fill  orders  and  transportation  facilities  become  clogged. 
Agriculture  furnishes  the  mainspring  of  industrial  activity. 

The  ways  of  agriculture  are  ways  of  pleasantness  and  all  her 
paths  are  Peace.  Besides  being  a peace  lover  by  nature,  the  hus- 


147 

bandman  from  Adam  down  has  found  his  pleasure  and  profit  in 
sitting  by  his  own  vine  and  fig  tree.  While  he  can  fight  to  save 
his  country,  whether  it  be  in  South  Africa  or  in  England,  or  under 
the  Stars  and  Stripes,  he  has  no  taste  for  blood  and  thunder,  and 
beats  his  sword  into  a pruning  hook  as  soon  as  the  battle  is  over. 
With  shattered  nerves,  impaired  fortune  and  devastated  home  he 
sets  himself  resolutely  to  work  to  provide  the  material  which  wifi 
restore  prosperity  to  his  own  and  other  industries. 

The  heaviest  public  burdens  the  farmer  has  to  bear  are  the 
taxes  laid  to  support  military  establishments  the  world  over,  and 
Universal  Peace  would  usher  in  utopian  conditions.  Great  stand- 
ing armies,  magnificent  battleships  and  impregnable  fortifications 
cost  vast  sums  of  money  and  can  be  sustained  only  by  wealthy 
nations.  If  these  constitute  the  most  effectual  means  of  preserv- 
ing peace,  no  expenditure  of  money  is  too  great  compared  with 
the  sacrifice  of  human  life  and  the  devastation  of  home  by  cruel 
wars.  The  lurking  suspicion  that  the  peaceful  influence  from 
this  source  may  have  been  over-estimated,  and  that  there  is  a safer 
and  surer  road  to  Universal  Peace  than  through  preparation  for 
war,  is  found  in  the  call  for  this  Peace  Congress  by  leading  patri- 
otic statesmen.  Arbitration  has  done  much  in  the  industrial 
world  in  averting  expensive  conflicts  between  capital  and  labor 
and  to  the  advantage  of  all  the  people.  An  extension  of  this 
policy  to  the  adjustment  of  differences  of  a character  and  magni- 
tude that  otherwise  would  plunge  nations  into  war,  would  be  of 
still  greater  advantage  to  all  the  people,  and  to  no  class  more  than 
the  farmers.  They  may  not  feel  the  disastrous  effects  of  war  so 
quickly  as  other  people,  but  it  finally  rests  upon  them  as  the  great 
producing  class. 

Great  victories  consist  in  something  more  than  the  ability  of 
one  nation  to  conquer  another  by  force  of  arms.  Many  so-called 
victories  have  spelled  defeat  when  all  the  results  were  taken  into 
account,  for  spectacular  effect  may  obscure  the  tangible  results. 
Real  victory  is  measured  by  the  result,  compared  with  the  sacri- 
fices made  to  secure  it.  In  most  cases  this  can  be  secured  through 
arbitration.  There  may  be  occasional  instances  when  there  is  no 
common  ground  upon  which  nations  can  meet,  but  such  instances 
are  no  rarer  in  the  dealings  between  nations  than  in  dealings 
between  individuals. 

I will  not  presume  to  suggest  how  this  can  be  brought  about, 


148 

for  those  who  have  been  prominent  in  arranging  this  Congress  are 
skilled  in  national  and  international  affairs.  It  is  reasonably  cer- 
tain that  such  wide  publicity  as  will  be  given  to  these  proceedings 
will  have  effect  in  promoting  a sentiment  for  Universal  Peace 
throughout  the  civilized  world.  It  is  also  probable  that  the  mag- 
nificent contributions  to  the  cause  of  education  made  by  the  distin- 
guished President  of  this  Congress  will  have  marked  effect  for  all 
future  time  in  promoting  the  Peace  sentiment.  The  establishment 
of  libraries  and  the  endowment  of  institutions  of  learning  through 
his  great  liberality  is  resulting  in  raising  the  standard  of  intelli- 
gence among  the  people,  and  as  intelligence  develops,  warlike 
tendencies  decline  among  people  and  among  nations. 

I thank  you,  Mr.  President,  for  recognizing  the  great  agricul- 
tural industry  of  the  country  by  extending  an  invitation  to  repre- 
sentatives of  it  to  attend  this  Congress.  It  may  be  a far  cry  from 
our  humble  homes  upon  the  farms  to  the  magnificence  of  this 
metropolis,  but  without  the  products  of  the  farm  and  the  toil  of 
millions  of  farmers  there  would  be  no  palatial  surroundings  any- 
where. My  only  object  upon  this  occasion,  so  graciously 
accorded  me,  is  to  express  the  sentiment  of  the  farmers  in  regard 
to  the  disastrous  effects  of  war,  their  deep  interest  in  the  objects 
of  this  Peace  Congress,  and  to  pledge  their  support  to  any  poli- 
cies that  may  be  inaugurated  by  it  for  the  promotion  of  Universal 
Peace.  We  believe  that  if  wars  can  be  averted,  all  industrial  and 
commercial  interests  will  be  promoted  without  detracting  one  iota 
from  our  dignity  as  citizens,  or  from  our  standing  as  a nation 
among  the  nations  of  the  wprld.  An  aroused  public  sentiment  is 
the  true  basis  for  securing  Universal  Peace. 

My  friends,  I thank  you  for  listening  to  me  so  patiently. 
I bring  you  the  greetings  of  the  farmers  of  the  country  in  this 
grand  work,  and  I say  to  you  that  they  have  not  much  sympathv 
with  the  military  spirit  that  seems  to  be  dominating  at  present 
every  country  of  the  world,  but  rather  they  believe  in  the  good 
old  doctrine  bequeathed  to  us  by  our  fathers:  “Peace  on  earth, 
good-will  to  men.”  (Great  applause.) 

Mr.  Marks 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  I think  I express  the  sentiment 
of  everyone  here  when  I say  to  the  representative  of  a million 
farmers  who  has  brought  this  lovely  message  to  us:  “Thank 
you,  Mr.  Bachelder.”  (Applause.) 


149 

We  have  with  us  a gentleman  who  represents  twenty-one 
republics.  His  voice  should  count.  He  is  ex-Minister  to  Colom- 
bia and  he  is  now  Director  of  the  International  Bureau  of  Ameri- 
can Republics  at  Washington.  It  gives  me  great  pleasure  to 
introduce  the  Hon.  John  Barrett. 


The  Permanency  of  the  Pan-American  Union 

John  Barrett 

If  one  fact  stands  out  more  prominently  than  any  other 
before  the  world  in  regard  to  the  International  Conferences  of  the 
American  Republics,  it  is  that  these  assemblages  are  now  recog- 
nized as  coming  at  regular  intervals  and  as  accomplishing  great 
and  significant  results.  Their  bearing  on  the  peace  and  good 
relations  of  the  countries  of  the  western  hemisphere  cannot  be 
overestimated.  They  have  so  much  to  do  with  promoting  har- 
mony of  interests  among  the  nations  concerned  that  all  other 
Governments  of  the  world,  especially  those  of  Europe,  must  con- 
cede that  they  are  second  only  in  international  significance  to  those 
gathering  at  The  Hague.  While  all  kinds  of  questions  affecting 
the  mutual  welfare  of  the  American  Republics  come  before  them 
for  consideration  and  discussion,  the  one  central  thought  inspir- 
ing the  best  effort  on  the  part  of  the  delegates  is  that  the  resolu- 
tions debated  or  approved  tend  to  promote  a better  understanding 
and  truer  friendship  among  them  all. 

The  three  Conferences  that  have  been  held  during  the  last 
fifteen  years  have  been  notable  successes.  They  have  accom- 
plished far  more  than  is  commonly  supposed.  They  have  been 
attended  by  the  ablest  men  of  the  different  nations  participating, 
and  they  have  adjourned  only  after  the  majority  of  the  delegates 
felt  that  they  had  satisfactorily  concluded  their  labors.  Like  all 
Conferences  they  have  passed  numerous  resolutions  and  made 
many  recommendations  which  have  not  been  formally  accepted 
or  approved  by  the  respective  Governments  of  the  delegates  sign- 
ing such  documents,  but  they  have  set  many  wheels  of  Pan-Ameri- 
can activities  in  motion  that  would  never  have  been  started  other- 
wise. It  is,  moreover,  safe  to  say  that  they  have  acted  as  a deter- 
ring influence,  not  only  on  wars  between  American  nations,  but 
on  revolutions  within  the  limits  of  different  countries.  Since 


150 

thes£  Conferences  first  began  to  assemble,  the  American  Republics 
have  been  getting  closer  and  closer  together,  and  the  number  of 
revolutions  has  greatly  decreased.  Because  at  the  moment  there 
may  be  a struggle  going  on  among  some  of  the  smaller  States 
of  Central  America,  there  can  be  no  conclusion  drawn  adverse  to 
the  tranquillity  and  good  relations  of  the  great  and  powerful 
Republics  of  Latin  America,  from  Mexico,  on  the  north,  to  Brazil, 
Argentina  and  Chili,  on  the  south. 

If  all  the  Pan-American  Conferences  had  accomplished  noth- 
ing else  than  the  establishment  of  the  International  Bureau  of 
the  American  Republics,  they  would  have  done  enough  to  war- 
rant their  being  called  together.  This  institution,  which  is  sup1 
ported  by  twenty-one  independent  nations  of  the  western  hemi- 
sphere, is  becoming  a powerful  international  agency,  not  only  for 
the  promotion  of  commerce  and  trade,  but  for  the  cementing  of 
closer  ties  of  friendship  and  association.  Ever  since  it  was 
founded  sixteen  years  ago,  as  a result  of  the  First  Pan-American 
Conference,  which  assembled  in  Washington  during  1889,  and 
was  presided  over  by  James  G.  Blaine,  it  has  gradually  grown 
in  usefulness  until  now  its  value  and  possibilities  are  acknowl- 
edged from  the  United  States  to  Argentina.  The  Second  Pan- 
American  Conference,  which  assembled  in  Mexico  in  1901-02, 
enlarged  its  scope,  while  the  Third  Conference,  which  gathered 
in  Rio  Janeiro  in  1906,  laid  out  a most  ambitious  plan  for  its 
work  in  the  future.  The  action  of  the  last  Conference  was  so 
closely  followed  by  the  great  diplomatic  journey  of  the  Secretary 
of  State  of  the  United  States,  Mr.  Elihu  Root,  and  this,  in  turn, 
by  such  an  awakening  of  interest  throughout  the  United  States  in 
Latin  Atnerica,  and  throughout  Latin  America  in  the  United 
States,  that  now  the  International  Bureau  is  conducting  a corre- 
spondence and  carrying  out  a policy  that  must  give  it  a unique 
position  of  prominence  and  power  in  the  opinion  of  the  world. 

When  that  distinguished  philanthropist,  Mr.  Andrew  Car- 
negie, recently  presented  the  International  Bureau  with  $750,000 
as  a New  Year's  gift  with  which  to  construct  a new  building,  he 
worthily  described  it  as  an  American  Temple  of  Peace.  When 
President  Roosevelt  thanked  Mr.  Carnegie,  he  remarked  that  this 
Bureau  should  perform  a work  for  the  western  hemisphere  not 
unlike  that  of  The  Hague  Institution  for  all  the  world.  In  the 
correspondence  which  Secretary  Root  conducted  with  Mr.  Car- 


I5I 

negie  in  reference  to  this  gift,  he  pointed  out  that  a new  era  was 
certainly  dawning  in  the  relations  of  the  American  Republics, 
which  would  be  characterized  by  peace,  prosperity,  and  the 
advancement  of  mutual  interests. 

There  is  nothing  whatever  antagonistic  to  the  policies  of 
European  countries  in  the  policy  and  plan  of  the  International 
Bureau.  To-day  its  Monthly  Bulletins  circulate  in  large  num- 
bers throughout  Europe  and  are  found  in  the  legations  and  con- 
sulates of  European  countries  in  all  parts  of  the  world.  European 
trade  publications  and  newspapers  quote  from  its  pages,  while  the 
Bureau’s  correspondence  department  is  continually  receiving  and 
answering  large  numbers  of  letters  of  inquiry  from  Europe  about 
commercial  opportunities  in  Latin  America.  The  Bureau  is  not 
bound  or  expected  to  assist  European  interests,  but  it  is  too  big 
and  broad  an  institution  to  show  any  antagonistic  attitude.  There 
is  plenty  of  room  in  Latin  America  for  the  commerce  of  all  the 
world.  The  United  States  has  no  desire  to  retard  the  growth 
of  European  trade  in  her  sister  Republics,  but  holds  that  there  is 
abundance  of  opportunity  for  the  United  States  and  Europe  alike ; 
and,  in  turn,  the  United  States  Government,  in  the  hope  of  seeing 
South  America  reaching  out  for  wider  markets  in  the  United 
States,  trusts  that  she  will  also  build  up  and  extend  her  trade  in 
Europe  as  well  as  in  the  United  States,  and  thereby  bring  about  a 
greater  prosperity  for  all  concerned. 

The  United  States  has  never  fully  appreciated  the  vast  impor- 
tance and  signal  success  of  the  visit  to  South  America  of  its  dis- 
tinguished Secretary  of  State,  Mr.  Elihu  Root.  It  is  beginning 
now,  after  nearly  a year  has  passed,  to  realize  that  no  other  Secre- 
tary of  State  in  the  history  of  the  United  States  has  accomplished 
so  much  for  the  promotion  of  international  friendship  as  has  Mr. 
Root  in  this  extraordinary  tour.  He  did  more  for  the  removal 
of  distrust  of  the  policies  of  the  United  States  throughout  South 
America  and  for  the  upbuilding  of  mutual  confidence  and  good- 
will, than  the  work  of  a hundred  years  of  ordinary  diplomatic 
procedure  and  intercourse.  Had  he  been  the  President  of  the 
United  States  or  of  France,  the  Emperor  of  Germany,  or  the 
King  of  England,  of  Spain,  or  of  Italy,  he  could  not  have  been 
given  a more  enthusiastic  welcome  or  been  treated  with  a more 
magnificent  display  of  cordiality  than  he,  as  Secretary  of  State  of 
the  United  States,  received  from  one  end  of  South  America  to 


152 

the  other.  The  benefits  of  his  meeting  representative  South 
Americans,  coming  into  contact  with  their  statesmen  and  people, 
addressing  them  directly  about  the  purposes  of  the  United  States, 
and  studying  their  political  conditions  and  material  resources, 
will  grow  with  the  passing  of  years  and  result  in  that  perfect 
international  American  comity  which  should  permanently  charac- 
terize the  relations  of  all  the  nations  of  the  western  hemisphere. 

Mr.  Marks 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : A prominent  Englishman  who 
visited  Washington  last  week  noticed  that  the  statues  on  the 
squares  and  in  the  parks  were  nearly  all  those  of  war  heroes.  If 
I read  the  signs  of  the  times  aright,  the  statues  that  we  will  see 
in  Washington  during  the  next  generation,  the  new  ones,  will 
be  the  statues  of  the  Heroes  of  Peace.  (Applause.) 

The  next  speaker  represents  one  of  the  handmaidens  of 
Peace — education.  He  is  a prominent  publisher  and  eminent  citi- 
zen of  Boston.  It  gives  me  pleasure  to  introduce  to  you  Mr. 
Edwin  Ginn,  of  Boston.  (Applause.) 

The  International  School  of  Peace 

Edwin  Ginn 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : Before  commencing  my  short 
speech  I wish  to  state  briefly  my  dissent  from  the  assertions  that 
have  been  made  here  that  we  need  large  armies  and  navies,  larger 
and  larger,  to  protect  the  nations  of  the  earth.  (Applause.)  We 
are  suffering  to-day  from  a hysteria  of  fear.  Armies  and  navies 
have  constantly  been  increasing.  Is  fear  among  the  nations  les- 
sening? I am  afraid  not.  My  suggestion  would  be  that  we 
create  an  international  police  force  to  safeguard  the  nations, 
rather  than  increase  the  capacity  of  each  nation  for  destroying 
the  other.  (Applause.)  I would  suggest,  not  a further  burden 
of  military  power,  but  that  the  nations  together  agree  to  allow 
five  per  cent,  of  their  present  armament  toward  the  formation  of 
an  international  military  guard.  If  this  force  were  found  to 
work  harmoniously  and  effectively,  in  another  three  or  four  years 
the  nations  would  say : ‘'Let  us  give  ten  per  cent,  of  our  present 
armament”;  and  when  they  came  to  realize  that  this  force  was 


153 

sufficient  to  guard  the  interests  of  all,  there  would  be  no  further 
need  of  these  immense  military  forces,  and  they  would  naturally 
fade  away. 

We  have  had  brought  to  our  attention  many  times  the  horrors 
of  war ; we  know  that  from  the  beginning  of  time  until  the  present 
moment,  the  activity  and  wealth  of  the  nations  has  been  largely 
employed  in  the  preparation  for  war  and  in  actual  contests. 
Much  of  this  active  warfare  is  past.  What  we  now  have  to  con- 
tend with  chiefly  is  the  continuous  preparation  for  war,  which  is 
taking  a large  proportion  of  the  surplus  earnings  of  the  world 
and  a large  number  of  able-bodied  men  from  productive  employ- 
ment. A few  years  ago  it  was  computed  that  there  were 
34,000,000  men  the  world  over,  either  permanently  or  temporarily 
under  arms,  5,000,000  of  whom  were  constantly  employed  in  this 
way.  The  expense  attending  these  preparations  for  war  cannot 
be  estimated  at  less  than  two  thousand  million  dollars  annually, 
and  the  value  of  the  time  of  these  men  engaged  in  warlike  pur- 
suits, if  employed  in  productive  labor,  would  amount  to  another 
two  thousand  million  dollars.  You  may  say  that  this  burden 
comes  mainly  upon  the  rich.  I wish  it  were  so.  But  from 
China,  Japan  and  Russia  comes  the  cry  of  starving  millions,  vic- 
tims of  this  cruel  system.  If  but  one-tenth  of  the  money  now 
being  spent  by  Japan  and  Russia  for  warlike  purposes  was 
expended  for  food  for  their  hungry  subjects,  it  would  not  be 
necessary  for  them  to  appeal  to  outside  nations  for  help. 

It  is  well  for  us  to  come  together  in  these  conventions  to 
bring  home  to  the  people  afresh  the  horrors  and  waste  of  war; 
but  if,  when  they  are  over,  we  go  to  our  homes,  take  up  our 
ordinary  vocations  and  do  nothing  until  another  year  rolls  around, 
it  will  be  a long  time  before  the  present  pernicious  system  will 
be  done  away  with.  The  Peace  Societies  are  doing  the  best  they 
can  with  the  money  at  their  command.  Good  books  are  being 
circulated.  Other  forces  are  at  work  in  the  right  direction.  But 
we  are  not  reaching  the  people. 

I do  not  find  anywhere  to-day  a stronger  arraignment  of 
the  present  war  system  than  that  of  Bloch,  Sumner,  Washington, 
Jefferson,  Franklin,  Channing,  Garrison  and  others;  yet  all  these 
efforts  have  not  succeeded  in  lessening  the  preparations  for  war. 
Never  before  in  the  history  of  the  world  have  the  outlays  in  this 
direction  been  so  enormous.  The  nations  are  straining  every 


154 

nerve  to  outstrip  each  other  in  their  preparations  for  combat. 
Frontiers  were  never  so  strongly  fortified ; armies  were  never  so 
thoroughly  equipped;  and  the  navies  of  the  world  have  doubled 
their  strength  in  the  last  fifteen  years.  A number  of  the  nations 
about  to  assemble  at  The  Hague  are  in  doubt  as  to  what  extent 
it  would  be  wise  even  to  discuss  the  question  of  the  limitation  of 
armaments.  England’s  Dreadnought  challenge  thrown  down  to 
the  world  has  been  accepted,  and  the  powers  are  duplicating  this 
monster  battleship.  We,  ourselves,  were  among  the  first  to  act. 
Why?  Is  there  any  intention  on  the  part  of  our  Government  to 
attack  our  sister  nations?  Have  they  any  disposition  to  attack 
us?  Years  ago  we  prided  ourselves  on  our  freedom  from  the 
military  burdens  from  which  the  old  world  was  suffering.  Now 
we  are  among  the  foremost  in  naval  expansion.  Has  this  tended 
either  to  lessen  other  nations’  fear  of  us  or  to  make  us  less 
anxious  for  our  own  safety?  Is  not  the  very  existence  of  these 
large  armaments  the  greatest  source  of  alarm  among  the  nations? 
They  feel  kindly  disposed  towards  each  other.  Why,  then,  this 
enormous  expenditure?  Is  it  to  meet  real  emergencies  or  imag- 
inary difficulties?  The  results  of  these  preparations  are  by  no 
means  imaginary.  They  are  immediate  and  distressing  and  need 
most  imperative  consideration.  We  should  get  at  the  very  roots 
of  this  evil. 

Is  there  not  a great  selfish  force  at  work  in  these  two  thou- 
sand million  dollars  of  appropriations  that  we  are  not  reckoning 
with?  The  present  system  means  a great  deal  of  business  for 
somebody ; there  are  large  contracts  to  be  secured.  Is  it  natural 
to  suppose  that  the  men  securing  these  valuable  contracts  can  be 
looked  to  for  their  curtailment?  Or  can  we  expect  men  in  mili- 
tary life,  the  officers  in  the  army  and  navy,  to  recommend  a reduc- 
tion of  armaments,  when  their  whole  training  and  chance  of  pro- 
motion is  dependent  upon  such  armaments?  I do  not  in  the 
slightest  degree  wish  to  reflect  on  the  honesty  and  integrity  of 
these  men.  They  compare  favorably  with  any  class  in  the  com- 
munity, but  I am  urging  general  considerations.  It  is  perfectly 
natural  that  this  biased  element  should  be  active.  You  all  noticed 
that  when  the  question  of  building  another  Dreadnought  was 
before  our  own  Congress,  the  daily  papers  were  filled  with  accounts 
of  the  activity  of  Japan,  of  her  military  preparation,  and  of  her 
desire  to  wrest  the  Philippines  from  us.  The  things  that  are 


155 

happening  with  us  are  happening  all  over  the  world.  Is  it  safe 
for  any  government  to  depend  upon  a board  of  military  experts 
to  tell  it  whether  its  army  or  navy  shall  be  increased  or  not? 
Ought  we  not  to  have  as  competent  experts  in  favor  of  Peace  as 
those  who  believe  in  war  ? Ought  there  not  to  be  in  every  capital 
of  the  world  men  of  great  ability  to  present  to  their  various 
parliaments  the  facts  upon  these  war  budgets  and  to  oppose  in 
the  interest  of  the  people  military  extravagance  ? 

As  a business  man  I have  to  look  at  this  question  along  the 
lines  of  business  success  in  other  enterprises;  and  it  does  seem 
to  me  that  we  are  not  sufficiently  aroused  to  the  importance  of  the 
work  before  us.  Have  we  presented  to  men  of  affairs  a suf- 
ficiently definite  proposition  to  induce  them  to  come  forward  liber- 
ally and  help  on  the  great  cause?  Have  we  not  rather  been  talk- 
ing to  the  galleries?  Can  any  business,  or  any  great  work,  be 
conducted  on  general  lines,  with  no  one  in  particular  to  look  after 
it?  From  my  experience,  not  only  must  there  be  able  and  highly- 
trained  persons  at  the  head,  but  they  must  give  the  work  con- 
stant supervision  every  day  in  the  year  if  success  is  to  be  attained. 

I do  not  disparage  the  Peace  Societies,  but  there  must  be 
larger  and  more  generous  organization.  To  my  mind  there  is 
but  one  way  to  compete  with  the  militarism  of  the  age.  We  must 
unite  all  the  elements  that  make  for  Peace  in  a supreme  effort 
against  this  terrible  scourge.  We  must  make  a business  of  edu- 
cating the  people,  beginning  with  the  children  in  the  home  and 
in  the  school.  Children  should  be  taught  that  military  parades 
in  holiday  dress,  the  manoeuvres  of  armies  and  navies  to  the  strains 
of  martial  music,  do  not  paint  war  in  its  true  light.  Take  them 
rather  to  the  battlefield  of  Waterloo,  as  painted  by  Victor  Hugo ; 
to  the  retreat  of  the  French  army  from  Moscow.  Put  before 
them  the  horrors  in  the  Russian-Japanese  war.  Training  with 
muskets  in  hand  should  be  banished  from  our  schools.  Every- 
thing that  tends  to  excite  a military  spirit  should  be  removed  from 
our  school  books.  Especially  should  our  histories  dwell  less  upon 
the  glories  of  war  and  much  more  upon  the  peaceful  industries 
that  minister  to  the  development  and  upbuilding  of  the  nations. 
(Applause.)  We  should  employ  people  whose  whole  duty  it 
should  be  to  work  among  the  teachers  along  these  lines  until  every 
teacher  in  the  land  should  be  an  Apostle  of  Peace.  The  same 
method  should  be  pursued  with  the  clergy  and  with  the  press.  A 


156 

bureau  of  information  should  be  established  for  the  purpose  of 
collecting  and  distributing  to  every  paper  in  the  land  matter  bear- 
ing vitally  on  this  subject.  Statesmen  should  be  aroused  to  the 
necessity  of  bringing  their  influence  to  bear  much  more  power- 
fully in  dissuading  their  governments  from  these  extravagant 
military  preparations.  Able  financiers  should  warn  bankers  that 
in  loaning  the  nations  at  these  high  rates  of  interest,  they  are 
taking  the  risk  of  losing  in  the  near  future  their  entire  principal. 
Clubs  should  be  established  in  every  city  and  town  in  the  land, 
to  work  actively  for  the  checking  of  the  war  spirit,  for  the  pre- 
vention of  the  present  tremendous  expenditure  for  military  pur- 
poses, and  for  the  election  of  representatives  to  carry  out  their 
wishes. 

"For  the  last  five  years  work  along  these  lines  through  the 
press,  the  schools,  and  the  clergy  has  been  going  on  in  a small 
way,  laying  the  foundations,  as  it  were,  for  an  International 
School  of  Peace , although  this  organization  has  not  been  pub- 
licly mentioned.  Some  of  the  best  peace  literature  extant  has 
been  published.  Its  representatives  have  attended  for  several 
years  the  great  Peace  Congresses  of  the  world,  and  three  years 
ago  aided  materially  in  bringing  the  International  Peace  Con- 
gress to  Boston,  in  making  out  the  program  of  work,  and  in  rais- 
ing the  funds  necessary  to  its  success.  The  protest  against  the 
coming  military  exposition  at  Jamestown  has  attracted  wide 
notice. 

If  so  much  has  been  accomplished  with  our  limited  organiza- 
tion and  resources,  what  might  we  not  hope  to  do  if  we  could 
secure  the  counsel  of  the  wisest  in  planning  out  a broader  educa- 
tional campaign,  and  the  funds  for  carrying  it  on  commensurate 
with  the  importance  of  the  work  in  hand?  Many  an  institution 
has  its  endowment  of  ten  million  dollars,  but  what  institution  of 
the  world  has  so  great  a work  to  do  as  this  International  School 
of  Peace,  established  for  the  purpose  of  creating  among  the 
nations  of  the  earth  the  friendship  and  brotherhood  of  man? 
(Applause.)  We  need  men  and  women  who  first  of  all  are 
embued  with  enthusiasm  for  the  work,  believing  it  to  be  the 
greatest  on  the  face  of  the  earth ; those  who  possess  the  true  spirit 
of  the  reformer,  the  spirit  which  actuated  a Luther,  a Garrison 
and  Phillips  of  our  own  day.  It  is  the  personality  of  the 
reformer  which  creates  enthusiasm.  He  brings  home  to  his 


157 

hearers  the  importance  of  his  subject  because  of  his  intense  earn- 
estness. He  knows  how  to  communicate  his  zeal  to  others  and 
turn  their  kindly  feelings  into  action.  We  need  men  of  that  kind 
and  we  must  make  it  possible  to  secure  the  co-operation  of  such 
if  we  would  rid  mankind  of  the  greatest  misfortune  of  all 
the  ages. 

Finally,  this  International  School  of  Peace  should  be  built 
on  a foundation  strong  enough  and  broad  enough  to  take  in  all 
the  different  organizations  for  carrying  on  the  world’s  work,  and 
merge  them  into  one  coherent,  effective  force  for  the  upbuilding 
of  society  in  every  corner  of  the  globe,  for  the  elimination  of  all 
the  influences  that  are  retarding  the  productive  work  of  man  in 
his  social,  intellectual  and  moral  progress,  and  for  the  strengthen- 
ing of  the  influences  that  tend  to  promote  good-fellowship  and 
the  welfare  of  all  mankind. 

Should  we  not  appoint  a committee  to  plan  the  work  of  such 
an  organization  and  secure  a proper  endowment?  This  com- 
mittee should  be  composed  of  broad-minded  men,  the  leaders  in 
education  and  industry,  who  know  how  to  organize  a great  work 
and  carry  it  to  a successful  issue.  Some  of  these  leaders  of 
industry  are  already  keenly  alive  to  the  necessary  work  and  are 
prepared  to  do  their  share  of  it. 

Are  we  expecting  a few  individuals  to  do  this  great  work? 
It  is  a world’s  task,  and  if  we  wish  to  see  it  move  on  as  it  should, 
it  must  be  undertaken  by  all,  each  one  of  us  taking  his  full  share 
of  responsibility,  however  great  or  small.  (Applause.) 

Mr.  Marks: 

This  meeting  will  be  brought  to  a glorious  close  by  Mr. 
William  McCarroll,  President  of  the  New  York  Board  of  Trade 
and  Transportation.  I now  introduce  to  you  Mr.  William 
McCarroll.  (Applause.) 

Commercial  Organization  as  a Peace  Promoter 

William  McCarroll 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : There  are  two  considerations  that 
will  prevent  a glorious  close.  The  first  one  is  the  speaker  and  the 
second  one  is  the  statement  that  this  meeting  would  be  closed  in 
fifteen  minutes  by  an  eloquent  speech,  for  which  there  is,  I 
believe,  just  about  a minute  and  a half.  (Laughter.) 


158 

Ladies  and  gentlemen,  I intend  to  do  it,  because  veracity  is 
the  quality  that  in  this  day,  by  the  highest  authority,  is  most  to  be 
esteemed.  (Laughter  and  applause.)  There  is  an  old  proverb 
which  says,  as  I recall  it,  that  “His  words  were  smoother  than 
butter,  but  in  his  heart  there  was  war” ; and  when  the  hour  for  the 
commissary  department  is  in  sight  and  a speaker  gets  up  to  close 
a meeting  with  a long  speech,  I believe  that,  however  smooth 
might  be  his  words,  in  the  heart  of  his  hearers  there  would  be 
war  (laughter)  and  in  a Peace  Meeting  that  would  be  very 
unbecoming.  (Laughter.) 

The  New  York  Board  of  Trade  and  Transportation  has  for 
many  years  taken  a deep  interest  in  the  movement  for  Interna- 
tional Arbitration  and  Peace.  It  has  watched  and  in  a measure 
shared  in  its  development.  To-day  it  joins  in  the  felicitations 
that  are  due  and  appropriate,  as  this  great  Congress  gathers  with 
representatives  from  many  nations  of  the  earth.  Its  meeting 
marks  the  progress  of  the  movement  which  itself  is  a measure  of 
the  onward  march  of  Christian  civilization. 

As  we  consider  this,  we  find  abundant  cause  for  congratula- 
tion. It  is  not  without  significance  to  us  that  this  month  of  April 
is  the  sixth  anniversary  of,  the  first  Hague  Court,  which  followed 
the  International  Conference  of  nearly  two  years  earlier,  which 
was  attended  by  one  hundred  delegates  from  twenty-six  nations. 
We  are  now  approaching  the  time  of  the  next  meeting  in  June,  at 
which  representatives  of  all  the  forty-five  nations  of  the  world 
will  be  present.  In  the  interim  of  these  gatherings,  indeed  within 
the  last  five  years,  more  than  sixty-five  national  disputes  have 
been  settled  by  arbitration,  and  within  the  last  three  years  twenty 
nations  have  signed  as  many  general  arbitration  treaties. 

It  is  eminently  fitting,  and  it  seems  something  in  the  nature 
of  compensating  justice,  that  commercial  organizations,  as  such, 
should  unite  in  and  actively  support  this  Peace  Movement.  This 
is  not  only  because  peace  is  a necessary  condition  for  commerce. 
Peace  may  exist  without  commerce,  though  that  would  be  the 
peace  of  stagnation.  But  general  commerce  cannot  flourish 
where  peace  does  not  prevail.  I say  “general”  commerce,  for  it 
is  true,  of  course,  that  war  produces  an  unusual  commercial 
demand  for  munitions  and  supplies.  The  claim  has  sometimes 
been  made  that  such  is  an  advantageous  result  of  war,  but  it  is 
at  most  limited  and  temporary,  and  the  suggestion  is  heartless 


159 

and  brutal.  War  robs  commercial,  industrial  and  agricultural 
pursuits  of  men,  and  means  ultimately  waste  and  loss.  The  result 
of  industrial  commerce  is  growth,  permanent  gain  and  prosperity. 

It  may  be  lamentably  true  that  almost  all  of  the  great  modern 
wars  have  been  chargeable  to  commercial  aggression,  or  shall  I 
say  aggressiveness  or  greed.  Undoubtedly  some  have  been 
promoted,  if  not  incited,  by  these.  It  is  not  necessary  to  instance 
any  of  these  wars,  for  doubtless  they  will  suggest  themselves  to 
you ; but  this  being  so,  there  is,  as  I have  said,  a justice  in  the  idea 
that  organizations  representing  commerce  should  now  unite  their 
efforts  in  behalf  of  Peace.  We  hope,  as  we  believe,  that  such 
wars  would  be  impossible  to-day,  though  in  our  own  time  we  have 
seen,  through  strenuous  insistence  on  “the  open  door”  by  some 
nations,  conditions  brought  into  sight  that  were  threatening  and 
ominous,  but  which,  fortunately,  passed  away.  It  is  true  that 
such  wars  could  not  occur  to-day;  that  is,  in  a great  degree  at 
least,  due  to  the  spread  and  progress  of  this  agitation  for  World 
Peace  begun  in  Boston  in  1815  and  since  consistently  followed 
and  urged  by  our  own  and  other  peoples. 

That  the  program  of  the  movement  is  logical,  practical  and 
hopeful,  its  history  up  to  date  gives  evidence.  At  the  recent 
Industrial  Peace  Conference,  held  at  the  home  of  our  honored 
Chairman,  Mr.  Carnegie,  Dr.  Lyman  Abbott,  in  his  forceful  and 
eloquent  words,  well  stated  the  method  to  be,  as  I recollect  him : 
“To  organize  the  world,  hitherto  disorganized,  politically  and 
industrially.”  By  this,  in  brief  summary,  we  understand  the 
object  to  be  the  bringing  together  of  the  nations  of  the  world, 
for  one  thing,  through  accredited  and  authorized  representa- 
tives who  shall  compose  a duty  -organized  body,  meeting  regularly 
to  confer  on  such  political  and  industrial  questions  as  concern  their 
relations.  This  body  might  in  due  time  lead  to  an  International 
Parliament,  with  such  powers  as  could  be  wisely  committed 
to  it  for  the  common  good ; in  the  meantime  it  could  promote 
such  congresses  as  the  present  by  the  Peace  Societies,  and  espe- 
cially through  the  Hague  International  Conference,  the  co-oper- 
ation of  the  nations  in  securing  Permanent  Peace  and  the  general 
welfare  of  their  peoples.  Surely,  a magnificent  and  noble  end ! 

Of  course  it  is  implied  and  would  be  understood  that  under- 
lying such  organization,  as  the  basis  of  full  success,  there  must 
be,  at  least  on  the  part  of  the  leaders,  a sense  of  community  of 


i6o 

interest,  a sentiment  of  one-world  relationship  of  men.  That  is 
best  expressed  in  the  higher  term  of  fraternity,  toward  which, 
may  we  not  say,  we  are  visibly  moving. 

Political  and  industrial  bonds  may  be  much  of  themselves, 
but  they  would  be  weak  indeed  in  the  face  of  provocation,  were 
there  not  the  fraternal  desire  and  spirit  which  makes  for  Peace. 
Commerce  is  at  once  a promoter  and  a beneficiary  of  this  senti- 
ment, which  is  an  outgrowth  of  the  intercourse  of  peoples.  When 
we  speak  of  commerce,  we  naturally  think  of  it  as  a great 
mechanical  movement  in  exchange  of  commodities.  It  is  imper- 
sonal to  our  thought ; but  in  analysis  we  see  that  there  are  in  it 
moral  and  individual  aspects  and  relationships  which  cannot  be 
lost  in  the  vast  aggregate.  These  count  and  reach  in  influence 
to  an  extent  we  cannot  measure. 

Commerce  is  the  work  of  persons.  Its  operations  should  be 
conducted  by  those  engaged  in  them  with  a moral  regard  for 
mutual  interests  and  welfare.  If  it  were  so,  there  would  be  an 
end  to  unjust  claims  of  territory,  of  concessions  or  privileges 
such  as  have  been  oftentimes  urged  to  the  point  of  war  on  weaker 
nations  or  their  citizens  by  a stronger.  The  ties  of  business 
would  be  cemented  by  respect  and  friendliness.  With  the  growth 
and  expansion  of  commerce,  the  whole  world  would  be  bound 
together  by  interests  far  more  potent  for  peace  and  progress  than 
those  of  financial  investments  or  considerations,  of  magnitude 
however  great,  though  these  interests  would  themselves  be  the 
outgrowth  of,  and  cultivated  by,  commerce.  I would  not  be 
understood  as  meaning  that  commerce  is  the  sole  force  working 
to  this  end ; but  it  is  powerful,  if  not  chief.  The  full  fruition, 
doubtless,  will  require  a long  period,  but  that  need  not  prevent, 
indeed  it  should  stimulate,  our  effort  to  hasten  the  day  devoutly 
to  be  wished. 

The  same  principles  suggested  by  what  I have  said  regarding 
commerce,  particularly  international  commerce,  would  also  be 
applicable  to  industrial  relations  everywhere,  and  produce  a like 
peace.  These  principles  constitute  the  spirit  of  the  “organization 
of  the  hitherto  unorganized  world.”  These  are  the  times  of 
organization.  By  all  means  let  us  have  this  supreme  organism — 
the  body — with  this  spirit  which  should  vitalize  it.  Let  it  grow 
and  develop  into  fullness  of  power  and  beneficence. 

There  are  many  phases  of  this  very  large  subject  of  the  com- 


i6i 


mercial,  industrial  and  agricultural  aspects  of  the  Peace  Move- 
ment,  such  as  their  economic  and  sociological  bearings,  and  we 
have  been  interested  in  the  discussion  of  some  of  them.  But 
there  is  only  time  for  me  to  add  a word  indicating  the  important 
part  that  may  be  taken  in  this  movement  by  commercial  and 
similar  organizations,  and  the  method  and  extent  of  their  influ- 
ence. This  is  three-fold.  In  the  first  place,  it  touches  the  indi- 
vidual members  whose  attention  is  attracted  by  the  presentation 
for  consideration  of  a given  subject — let  us  say  this  great  sub- 
ject— International  Arbitration  and  Peace.  Their  interest  is 
aroused.  They  are  stimulated  to  effort,  which,  in  the  second 
place,  reaches  out  into  the  connections  and  operations  of  such 
individuals.  Each  thus  becomes  a center  touching  others  in  turn. 
In  the  third  place,  though  not  the  least  important,  the  organiza- 
tion exerts  its  influence  as  a body,  according  to  its  importance,  on 
the  community  and  especially  on  those  whose  interest  or  action  it 
aims  to  secure  for  its  ends,  and  it  thus  furthers  and  carries  out  its 
objects.  As  such  a body,  the  New  York  Board  of  Trade  and 
Transportation  gives  its  hearty  adherence  to  the  program  of  this 
movement  as  representing  the  interest  of  commerce,  and  beyond 
and  above  that,  on  behalf  of  the  progress  of  humanity  and  civili- 
zation, through  the  establishment  of  peace  and  good-will  among 
men. 


XI 


SIXTH  SESSION 


YOUNG  PEOPLE’S  MEETING 

Carnegie  Hall 

Tuesday  Afternoon,  April  Sixteenth,  at  4 
DR.  WILLIAM  H.  MAXWELL  Presiding 
Dr.  Maxwell  : 

In  accordance  with  the  time-honored  custom  of  the  New 
York  public  schools,  this  meeting  will  be  opened  by  the  reading 
of  a passage  of  Scripture.  These  words  are  found  in  the  book 
of  the  Prophet  Isaiah : 

“And  it  shall  come  to  pass  in  the  last  days  that  the  mountain 
of  the  Lord’s  house  shall  be  established  in  the  top  of  the  moun- 
tains, and  shall  be  exalted  above  the  hills:  and  all  nations  shall 
flow  unto  it. 

“And  many  people  shall  go  and  say,  Come  ye,  and  let  us  go 
up  to  the  mountain  of  the  Lord,  to  the  house  of  the  God  of  Jacob; 
and  he  will  teach  us  of  his  ways,  and  we  will  walk  in  his  paths ; 
for  out  of  Zion  shall  go  forth  the  law,  and  the  word  of  the  Lord 
from  Jerusalem. 

“And  he  shall  judge  among  the  nations  and  shall  rebuke  many 
people;  and  they  shall  beat  their  swords  into  plowshares,  and 
their  spears  into  pruning  hooks : nation  shall  not  lift  up  sword 
against  nation,  neither  shall  they  learn  war  any  more.” 

Isaiah  2:  2,  3,  4. 

“The  wolf  also  shall  dwell  with  the  lamb,  and  the  leopard 
shall  lie  down  with  the  kid : and  the  calf  and  the  young  lion  and 
the  fading  together ; and  a little  child  shall  lead  them. 

“They  shall  not  hurt  nor  destroy  in  all  my  holy  mountain: 
for  the  earth  shall  be  full  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Lord,  as  the 
waters  cover  the  sea.” 


Isaiah  11:  6,  p. 


THE  LIBRARY 
OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Young  People’s  Meeting,  Tuesday  Afternoon,  April  16th 


163 

Dr.  Maxwell  : 

You  will  all  join  in  singing  the  Song  of  Peace,  led  by  the 
children’s  chorus. 


SONG  OF  PEACE. . .M.  K.  Schermerhorn A.  S.  Sullivan 


Forward,  all  ye  faithful, 
Seeking  love  and  peace, 
Hast’ning  on  the  era 

When  all  strife  shall  cease. 
All  the  saintly  sages, 

Lead  us  in  the  way, 

Forward  in  their  footsteps, 
Toward  that  perfect  day. 

Chorus  : 

Forward,  all  ye  faithful, 
Seeking  love  and  peace, 
Hast’ning  on  the  era 

When  all  strife  shall  cease . 

Raise  the  voice  of  triumph, 
“Peace  on  earth,  good  will” 
Angels  sang  this  anthem, 

Let  us  sing  it  still ; 

War’s  foundations  quiver 
At  this  song  of  peace, 
Brothers,  let  us  sing  it 
Till  all  strife  shall  cease. 
Chorus:  Forward,  etc. 


Children  of  one  Father 
Are  the  nations  all ; 

“Children  mine,  beloved,” 
Each  one  doth  He  call  ; 

Be  ye  not  divided, 

All  one  family; 

One  in  mind  and  spirit 
And  in  charity. 

Chorus:  Forward,  etc. 

Wealth  and  pow’r  shall  perish 
Nations  rise  and  wane; 

Love  of  others  only 
Steadfast  will  remain; 

Hate  and  Greed  can  never 
’Gainst  this  love  prevail; 

It  shall  stand  triumphant 
When  all  else  shall  fail. 

Chorus:  Forward,  etc. 


Dr.  Maxwell  : 

A great  Congress  has  met,  a great  Congress  is  now  in  session 
in  this  city,  under  the  presidency  of  our  honored  townsman,  Mr. 
Andrew  Carnegie.  The  purpose  of  this  Congress  is  one  of  the 
noblest  purposes  to  which  men  may  devote  their  thoughts  and 
their  energies.  It  is  no  less  than  to  devise  ways  and  means  by 
which  war  and  the  horrors  and  desolation  of  war  may  disappear 
from  the  face  of  the  earth.  Those  who  are  managing  this  great 
and  noble  work  have  judged  rightly,  that  if  peace  is  in  the  end 
to  triumph  over  war  it  must  be  chiefly  through  the  instru- 
mentality of  those  who  are  now  in  the  schools,  and  their  suc- 
cessors, who  will  soon  be  called  upon  to  take  up  their  tasks  in  the 
world’s  work.  Therefore  they  have  asked  you  to  come  here 
and  listen  to  addresses  from  eminent  men  and  women  and  to 


1 64 

carry  back  to  your  schools  the  message  which  has  been  delivered, 
or  will  be  delivered  this  afternoon. 

Before  calling  upon  any  of  the  speakers,  I desire  to  read  to 
you  a very  brief  letter,  which  was  put  in  my  hands  just  as  I was 
coming  upon  the  platform.  It  is  from  a gentleman  who  I had 
fondly  hoped  would  be  able  to  come  here  to  speak  to  you : 

“Dear  Dr.  Maxwell:  I have  just  had  handed  to  me  yours 
of  the  1 2th  of  April,  and  nothing  would  give  me  more  pleasure, 
but,  alas,  I am  to  be  at  the  dedication  of  the  Engineers’  Building, 
of  which  I am  donor,  at  3 o’clock,  which  renders  it  impossible 
for  me  to  have  the  pleasure  of  speaking  to  the  children;  I am 
very  sorry.  Very  truly  yours, 

“Andrew  Carnegie.” 

The  first  speaker  of  the  afternoon  will  speak  to  you  on  the 
subject  of  the  Peace  Movement  and  the  Arts.  Professor  Bailey, 
who  will  make  this  address,  has  devoted  his  life  to  art  and  art 
instruction.  I have  the  pleasure  and  honor  of  introducing  to 
you  Professor  Bailey. 

The  Peace  Movement  and  the  Arts 

Professor  Henry  Turner  Bailey. 

In  the  realm  of  the  arts  man  has  suffered  incalculable  and 
irreparable  losses  through  war.  The  paths  of  great  military 
heroes  like  Sargon,  Cambyses,  Scipio,  Mummius,  Titus,  Alaric, 
Attila,  Omar,  Dandolo,  Alva,  have  always  been  marked  by  the 
destruction  of  temples,  the  burning  of  palaces,  the  looting  of 
cities,  and  the  annihilation  of  priceless  treasures,  precious  works 
of  art  impossible  to  reproduce  by  any  means  whatever.  The 
beheaded  granite  Kings  of  Egypt,  the  broken  horsemen  of  the 
Parthenon,  the  mutilated  saints  of  the  shrines  of  England,  cry 
out  forever,  like  the  souls  beneath  the  altar  in  John’s  vision, 
“How  long,  O Lord,  holy  and  true?”  When  shall  the  ravages 
of  war  be  stayed?  “The  insatiate  tooth  of  time”  alone  did  not 
rob  us  of  “the  glory  that  was  Greece  and  the  grandeur  that  was 
Rome”;  time  did  not  strip  Achaea  to  adorn  Italy,  nor  plunder 
Italy  to  enrich  barbarian  Gaul,  nor  burn  the  Alexandrian  library. 
War  did  these  things.  War  has  reduced  the  history  of  art  to  the 
history  of  fragments  and  wrecks.  War  has  swallowed  up  all 


i65 

but  a handful  of  the  wonderful  works  of  the  artists  and  craftsmen 
of  a thousand  generations,  and  left  us  poor  indeed. 

Lamenting  this  wholesale  destruction,  one  must  not  forget 
that  periods  of  war  have  often  been  followed  by  periods  of  con- 
structive activity  in  the  arts.  The  reasons  for  this  are  evident. 
Human  nature  abhors  a vacuum.  The  people  who  survive  the 
war  must  go  on  living.  Desolated  cities  must  be  repaired ; ruined 
temples  must  be  restored;  lost  treasures  must  be  replaced.  And 
in  the  country  of  the  conqueror  there  must  be  triumphal  arches, 
new  palaces,  new  theatres,  to  celebrate  the  triumph ; medals  must 
be  struck,  stones  must  be  set  up  in  honor  of  local  heroes. 

But  what  is  the  quality  of  such  forced  art,  art  produced 
under  the  poverty  and  bitterness  of  defeat,  or  upon  the  order  of 
the  victor?  Americans  need  not  re-read  the  history  of  art  to  find 
an  answer  to  this  question.  All  they  need  to  do  is  to  examine 
the  architecture  and  sculpture  produced  in  the  southern  part  of 
their  own  country  from  1865  to  1890,  and  the  architecture  and 
sculpture  in  the  form  of  memorial  halls  and  soldiers’  monuments 
produced  in  the  northern  part  of  their  country  by  the  men  of  that 
generation.  On  the  one  hand  they  will  discover  works  of  neces- 
sity only,  feeble  in  design  and  unadorned;  on  the  other  works 
of  supererogation,  crude  in  structure  and  ugly  in  decoration, 
works  which  even  the  second  generation  blushes  to  call  art. 
“Beauty  will  not  come  at  the  call  of  a legislature,”  said  Emerson, 
“nor  will  it  repeat  in  England  or  America  its  history  in  Greece. 
It  will  come,  as  always,  unannounced,  and  spring  up  beneath  the 
feet  of  brave  and  earnest  men  ...  in  the  field  and  roadside, 
in  the  shop  and  mill.” 

The  incompatibility  of  war  and  the  arts  is  symbolized  in 
every  decorative  representation  of  Peace  ever  painted.  Under 
Peace  the  plough  and  the  spade  are  plied;  the  distaff  and  the 
shuttle,  the  needle  and  the  pencil  are  taken  in  hand ; the  potter  is 
at  his  wheel,  the  carpenter  at  his  bench,  the  smith  at  his  forge, 
the  draftsman  at  his  table,  the  artist  at  his  easel ; the  mother  sings 
at  her  work ; the  children  make  music  in  the  twilight.  The  insight 
of  the  artist  has  never  failed  to  make  such  interpretation  of  Peace. 
Artists  perceive  the  truth  beneath  all  its  wrappings. 

If  a war  at  times  has  galvanized  the  arts  into  semblance  of 
life,  Peace  has  ever  breathed  into  them  the  very  spirit  of  life 
itself.  Artists  have  an  instinctive  dread  of  war,  and  the  crafts- 


men  in  all  ages  have  fought  only  under  compulsion.  The  high 
tides  in  artistic  production,  in  the  age  of  Pericles,  in  the  age  of 
Augustus,  in  the  period  of  the  high  Renaissance,  were  times  of 
comparative  peace.  The  Elizabethan  era  in  England  which  gave 
Shakespeare  to  the  world,  and  the  Victorian  era  which  produced 
Tennyson  and  Browning  were  times  when  the  national  mind  felt 
free, — confident  of  its  power  to  maintain  an  armed  Peace.  The 
last  forty  years  in  America,  during  which  the  nation  has  made 
such  strides  in  wealth  and  efficiency,  and  has  developed  such  a 
consciousness  of  national  existence  and  potency,  have  been  years 
of  Peace. 

But  these  periods  of  Peace,  and  of  great  activity  in  the  arts, 
appear  in  the  arts,  appear  in  history  like  the  fitful  gleams  of 
intelligence  in  a mind  for  the  most  part  crazed  with  greed  and 
hate.  The  world  has  yet  to  see  what  the  arts  may  become  under 
perpetual  Peace. 

Peace  fosters  the  prosperity  of  the  common  people.  This 
means  an  ever-increasing  demand  for  clothing,  houses,  furniture, 
carpets,  draperies,  pottery,  silverware,  wall-papers,  pictures,  orna- 
ments, books,  musical  instruments  and  equipage  of  every  sort. 

Peace  fosters  the  growth  of  commerce.  This  means  an  ever- 
increasing  demand  for  a perfected  machinery  for  business ; print- 
ing presses,  typewriters,  mail  systems,  telegraphs,  telephones,  cash 
carriers,  automobiles,  railroads,  ships,  business  blocks,  subways 
and  the  thousand  and  one  labor-saving  devices  which  may  be 
invented,  to  say  nothing  of  the  machinery  required  by  the  manu- 
facturers. 

Peace  fosters  the  growth  of  intelligence.  This  means  an 
ever-increasing  demand  for  tasteful  homes,  clean  cities,  accessible 
parks,  good  schools,  public  lecture  halls,  libraries,  gymnasia  and 
baths,  museums,  picture  galleries  and  noble  civic  buildings.  It 
means  ever  better  pictures,  finer  music,  more  inspiring  literature, 
greater  beauty  of  design  in  every  manufactured  object,  in  short, 
a perfected  environment. 

Peace  fosters  the  growth  of  love.  This  means  an  ever- 
increasing  demand  for  works  of  art  which  shall  perpetuate  the 
memory  of  worthy  men  and  women,  portraits,  tablets,  monu- 
ments, fountains,  statues,  halls,  chapels  and  other  materials ; and 
an  ever-increasing  demand  for  places  of  worship,  temples  where 
every  beauty  of  proportion,  structure,  texture,  color  and  symbol- 


167 

ism  shall  combine  to  inspire  the  soul  with  a sense  of  the  presence 
of  the  One  who  said,  “Be  ye  perfect,  even  as  your  Father  in 
heaven  is  perfect.” 

The  arts  have  produced  some  of  these  things  in  the  past,  but 
they  have  been  for  the  few,  for  kings  and  priests,  for  the  rich  and 
powerful,  and  for  those  who  might  make  it  possible  to  have  and 
to  hold  for  a time  the  good  things  of  life.  The  arts  have  never 
had  the  chance  to  produce  for  the  sovereign  people.  Nor  will 
they  have  that  chance  until  war  shall  be  no  more.  With  the  dawn 
of  Universal  Peace  the  arts  will  come  to  their  own,  and  every 
vision  of  every  artist  and  every  skill  of  every  craftsman  will  be  in 
perpetual  demand. 

Hints  of  the  transformations  to  be  made  are  to  be  found  in 
the  encircling  boulevards  of  Florence,  marking  the  medieval 
walls,  in  the  smiling  gardens  of  Nuremberg,  filling  its  old  mote, 
in  the  water  fronts  of  Antwerp  and  Hamburg,  in  the  river  banks 
of  Dresden  and  Paris,  in  the  park  systems  of  New  York  and 
Philadelphia,  in  the  libraries  of  Boston  and  Washington,  in  the 
cathedrals  of  Pittsburg  and  Albany,  in  the  home  crofts  of  Brook- 
line and  Montclair  and  the  suburbs  of  a hundred  other  American 
cities.  But  these  are  hints  only.  There  is  much  land  to  be 
possessed. 

A stupendous  amount  of  good  work  must  be  done  before  all 
the  homes  of  men  shall  be  “homes  of  virtue,  sense  and  taste” ; 
before  all  the  paraphernalia  of  commerce  shall  be  so  perfect  that 
one  can  write  “Holiness  unto  the  Lord”  even  “upon  the  bells  of 
the  horses”;  before  all  the  cities  of  the  world  shall  reflect  the 
image  of  the  New  Jerusalem;  before  all  God’s  children  shall  be 
able  to  “worship  Him  in  the  beauty  of  holiness.” 

The  realization  of  these  ideals  is  the  next  Gaul  to  conquer, 
the  next  New  World  to  discover,  the  next  Africa  to  explore,  the 
next  Pole  to  reach.  The  arts,  under  universal  peace,  will  offer 
to  young  men  of  spirit  infinite  opportunities  to  win  the  per- 
petual gratitude  of  mankind. 

Dr.  Maxwell: 

The  next  speaker,  who  has  devoted  his  life  to  teaching,  is  the 
State  Superintendent  of  Instruction  for  the  great  Commonwealth 
of  Pennsylvania,  upon  whom  his  fellow  teachers  of  the  United 
States  have  conferred  the  highest  honor  in  their  gift,  the  Presi- 


dency  of  the  National  Education  Association.  I have  the  honor 
to  present  to  you  Dr.  Schaeffer. 

Teaching  Peace  Ideals 

Dr.  Nathan1  C.  Schaeffer. 

As  soon  as  the  average  girl  begins  to  study  the  history  of 
the  United  States  she  begins  to  wish  she  had  been  born  a boy. 
Her  text-books  magnify  the  achievements  of  men  and  devote 
very  little  space  to  the  deeds  of  women.  She  gradually  reaches 
the  conviction  that  everything  great  and  heroic  belongs  to  the 
opposite  sex,  and  that  life  is  not  worth  living  unless  one  can 
attain  military  glory. 

The  boy  is  apt  to  form  similar  ideals  from  our  text-books 
on  history  and  from  our  methods  of  teaching  the  subject.  The 
names  of  admirals  and  generals,  the  battles  they  fought  and  the 
victories  they  won,  the  causes  and  the  effects  of  war  consti- 
tute a very  large  part  of  the  material  of  instruction.  The  exam- 
ination questions  which  are  supposed  to  emphasize  the  most 
important  portions  of  the  school  curriculum  bristle  with  wars 
and  the  things  of  war.  The  boy  loves  power  and  admires  every 
exhibition  of  personal  and  national  strength;  he  admires  the 
heroes  whose  names  are  immortalized  upon  the  pages  of  history; 
he  gradually  conceives  the  notion  that  the  wearing  of  a uniform, 
the  carrying  of  a gun  or  sword,  the  shedding  of  blood  and  the 
acquisition  of  military  renown  are  essential  to  a life  worth  living. 

It  seems  to  me  that  our  text-books,  our  examinations  and 
our  instruction  in  history  should  glorify  the  victories  of  Peace 
above  the  victories  of  war.  In  other  words,  history  should  be 
taught  from  a more  rational  point  of  view.  Whilst  it  is  not  wise 
to  rob  the  soldier  of  his  just  share  of  glory,  while  it  would  be 
a mistake  to  minimize  the  sacrifices  which  an  army  or  a navy 
makes  in  the  defense  of  national  rights  and  in  the  protection  of 
the  down-trodden  and  the  oppressed,  it  will  nevertheless  be  wise 
to  emphasize  the  arts  of  Peace  above  the  art  of  war,  and  to 
teach  history  in  such  a way  that  the  pupil  will  write  the  name 
of  the  poet,  the  orator,  the  artist,  the  inventor,  the  educator,  the 
jurist  and  the  statesman  in  as  conspicuous  a place  in  the  temple 


i6g 

of  fame  as  that  occupied  by  the  name  of  the  victorious  general 
or  the  successful  admiral. 

At  the  time  when  the  teacher  is  instilling  proper  ideals  of 
heroism  and  of  life  the  boy  can  be  taught  to  despise  not  only  the 
“bully”  who  is  anxious  to  pick  a quarrel  with  weaker  com- 
panions, but  also  the  nation  that  is  ever  ready  to  begin  a quarrel 
with  weaker  nations.  He  can  be  taught  to  distinguish  the  dif- 
ferent kinds  of  war.  There  is  the  war  for  tribute;  no  civilized 
government  can  afford  to  exact  blood-money  under  the  guise 
of  a war  indemnity.  The  wars  for  booty,  such  as  the  robber 
barons  of  the  middle  ages  carried  on,  are  no  longer  tolerated  by 
the  civilized  world.  War  for  the  gratification  of  personal  ambi- 
tion, like  the  wars  of  Napoleon,  is  no  longer  possible.  Our 
country  has  not  always  been  guiltless  of  the  war  for  territorial 
aggrandizement,  but  this  kind  of  war  should  be  condemned  by 
both  teacher  and  text-book. 

More  can  be  said  in  favor  of  a war  for  principle,  like  our 
Revolutionary  War,  and  of  a war  to  protect  the  weak  and  help- 
less, but  even  then  it  is  well  to  let  the  pupil  see  both  sides  of 
the  dispute,  and  to  point  out  to  him  how  international  disputes 
may  be  settled  by  arbitration  as  a substitute  for  war.  How 
well  posted  we  all  are  upon  every  war  that  our  people  have 
waged ; how  little  we  know  of  the  two  hundred  and  fifty  disputes 
which  have  been  settled  by  the  peaceful  method  of  international 
arbitration!  How  familiar  we  are  with  the  Monroe  Doctrine, 
and  how  seldom  we  speak  of  the  arrangement  made  during 
Monroe’s  administration  for  disarming  along  our  Canadian 
boundary — an  arrangement  that  has  secured  Peace  between  the 
United  States  and  Great  Britain  in  spite  of  all  the  acute  disputes 
which  have  arisen  since  the  war  of  1812. 

Patriotism  is  a virtue,  but  it  may  be  so  taught  that  the 
citizen  will  resort  to  everything  mean  and  contemptible  for  the 
sake  of  furthering  the  material  interests  of  his  country.  Our 
teaching  of  history  should  give  rise  to  a public  sentiment  that 
will  make  it  impossible  for  a ruler  or  a government  to  begin 
war,  except  for  the  maintenance  of  justice,  law  and  order  among 
the  great  brotherhood  of  nations,  especially  among  the  partially 
civilized  peoples  and  tribes  in  distant  parts  of  the  globe. 


170 

ANGEL  OF  PEACE O.  W.  Holmes Keller 

Arranged  by  F.  R.  Rix. 

Angel  of  Peace,  thou  hast  wandered  too  long ! 

Spread  thy  white  wings  to  the  sunshine  of  love ; 

Come  while  our  voices  are  blended  in  song, 

Fly  to  our  ark  like  the  storm-beaten  dove ! 

Fly  to  our  ark  on  the  wings  of  the  dove. 

Speed  o’er  the  far-sounding  billows  of  song, 

Crowned  with  thine  olive-leaf  garland  of  love, 

Angel  of  Peace,  thou  hast  waited  too  long! 

Brothers  we  meet,  on  this  altar  of  thine, 

Mingling  the  gifts  we  have  gathered  for  thee; 

Sweet  with  the  odors  of  myrtle  and  pine, 

Breeze  of  the  prairie  and  breath  of  the  sea, 

Meadow  and  mountain  and  forest  and  sea. 

Sweet  is  the  fragrance  of  myrtle  and  pine, 

Sweeter  the  incense  we  offer  to  thee, 

Brothers  once  more,  ’round  this  altar  of  thine! 

Angels  of  Heaven  now  answer  the  strain, 

Hark ! a new  anthem  is  filling  the  sky ! 

Loud  as  the  storm-wind  that  tumbles  the  main, 

Bid  the  full  breath  of  the  organ  reply, 

Let  the  loud  tempest  of  voices  reply. 

Roll  its  long  surge  like  the  earth-shaking  main ! 

Swell  the  vast  song  till  it  mounts  to  the  sky ! 

Angels  of  Heaven  re-echo  the  strain ! 

Dr.  Maxwell  : 

The  next  address  will  be  made  by  a gentleman  who  has  done 
much  to  secure  the  promotion  of  the  Peace  Movement  in  this 
city.  I have  the  pleasure  of  presenting  Mr.  Charles  Sprague 
Smith. 


The  Kingdom  by  the  Sea 

Professor  Charles  Sprague  Smith. 

I am  going  to  speak  to  you  to-day  about  a kingdom  in  an 
age  far  away,  in  a land  far  away.  The  territory  of  this  kingdom 
was  not  very  extensive;  not  much  larger,  probably,  than  the 
territory  of  our  Greater  City.  The  kingdom  was  protected  on 
three  sides  by  the  sea;  on  the  fourth,  the  land  had  extended 
originally  in  a broad,  sweeping  plain  out  of  sight.  But  from 


171 

time  immemorial  it  had  been  accepted  as  custom,  as  necessity, 
that  the  city  and  its  inhabitants  should  be  protected  on  that  land 
side,  that  plain  side,  until  a great  portion  of  the  energy  of  the 
inhabitants  had  been  spent  upon  erecting  a wall,  a huge  barrier 
of  earth  and  stone.  It  had  been  built  for  decades,  it  had  been 
built  for  centuries,  and  with  the  centuries  it  had  arisen  until  if 
stood  there  shutting  out  the  sunlight,  shutting  out  the  day,  a 
high,  broad,  frowning  mountain.  Kings  came  and  went,  and 
centuries  came  and  went,  until  at  last  a king  came  to  that  land, 
one  who  had  not  spent  his  entire  time  within  the  mountain- 
sheltered  city,  but  had  wandered  abroad.  As  he  wandered,  the 
thought  awoke  within  him  that  the  strength  of  a city,  the  per- 
manence of  its  civilization,  depended  quite  as  much  upon  the 
existence  of  friendship  as  upon  that  of  hostility  between  man 
and  man;  and  so,  too,  the  after-thought  that  the  best  thing  to 
which  he  could  devote  the  energies  of  his  subjects  was  to  remove 
that  mountain  which  stood  there  shutting  out  the  day,  shutting 
out  the  sunlight  and  thus  closing  the  path  to  intimate  tender 
relations  with  those  who  were  living  on  the  other  side  of  the 
mountain.  So  he  called  his  old  counsellors  to  him,  those  who 
had  grown  gray  in  council,  and  those  who  had  grown  gray  in 
war,  and  he  laid  his  thoughts  before  them.  They  said  to  him : 
‘fSire,  we  are  your  servants,  and  it  is  our  duty  and  privilege 
to  do  as  you  bid.  If,  therefore,  it  is  your  bidding,  we  will  go 
about  it  and  remove  that  mountain  which  for  centuries  our 
ancestors  have  reared,  but  we  advise  your  majesty  against  it. 
It  has  not  been  custom,  it  has  not  been  so  received  among  us, 
there  is  danger  in  doing  it.”  Some  few,  indeed,  assented  to  the 
king’s  proposal,  but  the  large  majority  opposed  it.  And  so  the 
king  dismissed  his  counsellors.  Old  age,  he  thought,  will  not 
dare  to  enlist  in  such  an  enterprise.  So  I will  call  the  men  who 
have  just  come  to  the  strength  of  manhood,  my  men  of 
middle-age. 

He  summoned  them,  and  they  came  from  their  various 
pursuits ; some  from  bearing  arms,  standing  as  warders  of  that 
mountain ; others  from  among  the  builders,  who  were  ever 
strengthening  its  foundations.  Gathering  them  about  him,  he 
repeated  the  same  words,  and  received  again  essentially  the  same 
answer.  They  said  to  him,  “Our  lives  have  been  spent  in  defend- 
ing this  city  and  in  strengthening  its  fortifications  against  out- 


172 

siders;  we  are  not  accustomed  to  this  thought.  Your  majesty, 
we  hardly  dare  undertake  that  which  you  counsel,  nevertheless, 
if  it  be  your  majesty’s  will,  we  will  enlist  actively  in  this  cause.” 
He  dismissed  them,  and  then  took  counsel  with  himself  and  said, 
“Not  even  to  those  who  have  come  to  the  full  maturity  ot 
their  powers  can  I turn;  their  thoughts  are  firmly  directed  along 
certain  wonted  lines;  I must  go  to  the  morning  of  my  kingdom 
where  faith  and  hope  still  shine  with  undiminished  radiance.” 
And  so  proclaiming  a holiday  to  all  the  schools  throughout  his 
kingdom,  he  assembled  the  children  and  the  youths  in  his  great 
courtyard — the  blossoms,  the  human  spring  blossoms  of  his 
kingdom. 

He  was  loved  by  all  his  people,  and  in  tender,  fatherly 
words  he  delivered  to  the  children  the  same  message  which  he 
had  spoken  to  their  grandsires  and  their  sires,  and  he  asked: 
“Have  you  faith,  have  you  hope?  Do  you  believe,  my  children, 
that  we  can  level  that  mountain  and  that  we  can  trust  to  the 
growing  friendship  between  those  who  live  beyond  that  mountain 
and  ourselves?  In  their  schools  are  children  resembling  you 
here,  with  the  same  earnestness,  the  same  morning  freshness 
which  your  upturned  faces  show.”  He  did  not  have  long  to 
wait  for  an  answer.  A little  girl  in  the  very  front  row  of  the 
children  clapped  her  hands,  and  cried,  “Sire,  Sire,  we  will  be 
your  servants,  we  will  help  you  to  level  that  mountain.”  The 
words  of  the  child  were  repeated  swiftly  from  group  to  group, 
to  the  outmost  circle,  and  with  the  clapping  of  hands  and  the 
exultant  voices  of  children,  re-echoed  by  that  frowning  moun- 
tain that  had  been  for  centuries  shutting  out  the  day  and  the 
sunlight,  the  children  resolved  that  their  lives  should  be  spent 
henceforth  in  leveling  the  mountain  that  separated  man  from 
man,  preventing  close  relations,  preventing  love  growing  between 
peoples  kindred  in  blood  and  near  in  dwelling. 

I am  not  going  to  tell  you  thafr  in  a day  all  was  accom- 
plished, but  I am  going  to  say  to  you  this,  that  what  had  been 
heaped  up  in  twenty  years  was  leveled  in  one  year,  the  work  of 
a month  undone  in  a day,  for  when  faith  and  hope  and  the  full 
consummation  of  life  that  comes  with  faith  and  hope  set  them- 
selves to  a task,  that  task  is  accomplished  with  speed  and  joy. 
So  the  word  passed  quickly  beyond  the  mountain,  and  the  chil- 
dren of  the  peoples  beyond  took  up  the  work  until  the  mountain 


173 

was  leveled,  and  the  material  wherewith  it  had  been  built  was 
used  to  fill  the  swamps  and  to  construct  broad  highways  between 
people  and  people.  So  when  those  children  had  come  to  mature 
years,  not  a frowning  mountain  shut  out  the  day,  but  broad 
ways  opened  leading  man  to  man,  and  over  those  ways  peace 
and  friendship  and  all  that  comes  with  them  passed  to  and  fro. 

That  is  a story  of  bygone  days.  But  there  is  also  a story 
of  the  present.  Ours  is  a land  favored  above  all  lands  of  the 
earth,  protected  as  none  other  by  nature  against  hostile  force 
or  skill.  The  thought  of  Peace  has  come,  is  coming  fast  here — 
the  appeal  from  the  less  favored  nations  to  our  America  to  lead 
the  world  to  Peace.  The  word  is  spoken  to  those  passing  into 
older  age;  to  those  who  are  coming  to  the  full  maturity  of 
ripened  power.  In  both  instances  it  finds  enthusiastic  recruits; 
but  it  finds  also  many  who  hold  back.  And  so  it  turns  to  the 
children.  Oh,  if  the  children  of  America,  that  nation  to  which 
has  been  given  supremely  the  gift  of  liberty,  the  gift  of  oppor- 
tunity— if  the  children  of  America  would  to-day  join  hands  from 
sea  to  sea  and  resolve  that  Peace  shall  now  come  to  the  world, 
and  send  forth  that  message  to  their  brothers  and  sisters  in 
other  nations,  by  the  time  you,  our  children  here,  had  reached 
your  maturity  Peace  would  come  to  abide.  And  so  it  is  that  in 
the  name  of  Peace  I have  ventured  to  draw  up  a resolution,  and 
I am  going  to  say  to  you  children  that  I am  very  much  spoiled 
as  regards  resolutions.  Whenever  I read  them  down  in  my 
working  home  at  the  Cooper  Union,  they  are  passed  unanimously 
by  the  audiences,  and  so  I expect  them  to  be  passed  unanimously 
here. 

This  is  the  resolution : 

“We,  the  representatives  of  the  public  and  private  schools  of 
New  York,  and  delegates  from  the  schools  of  the  country  at 
large,  believe  that  the  time  has  fully  come  to  substitute  arbi- 
tration for  war  as  the  only  right  method  for  the  settlement  of 
disputes  between  nations,  and  that  in  this  work  for  Peace  the 
children  of  to-day,  the  adults  of  to-morrow,  are  to  do  a large, 
if  not  the  largest  part. 

“Resolved,  that  it  is  the  sense  of  all  present  that  a Children’s 
Peace  League  be  now  formed,  and  that  invitations  be  sent  to  the 
children  of  other  nations  to  organize  similar  leagues.” 


174 


Dr.  Maxwell  : 

All  in  favor  of  passing  the  resolutions  will  say  “Aye” ; those 
opposed  “No.”  The  resolutions  are  unanimously  passed.  (Ap- 
plause.) I shall  ask  Professor  Dutton  to  read  two  telegrams 
which  will  interest  you. 

Professor  Samuel  T.  Dutton  : 

It  will  interest  the  boys  and  girls  who  are  here  to  know 
that  this  is  not  only  a National  Congress  but  it  has  become  an 
International  Congress  by  the  fact  that  we  have  so  many  here 
from  abroad,  and  because  of  the  greetings  that  are  coming  to 
us  from  different  countries.  I have  here  several  cablegrams 
which  have  been  received  during  the  last  two  or  three  days,  but 
I want  to  read  only  two;  one  from  the  King  of  Norway:  “I 
beg  you  to  bring  my  best  greetings  to  the  National  Arbitration 
and  Peace  Congress  whose  work,  I hope,  may  promote  the  great 
purpose  of  advocating  peaceful  settlement  of  international  mis- 
understandings, a purpose  in  which  the  Norwegian  people  take 
such  lively  interest.” 

And  one  also  from  a Southern  nation,  from  the  King  of 
Italy:  “Cordial  thanks  for  the  courtesy  of  your  invitation,  with 
the  good  news  that  the  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress  by  the 
illustrious  benefactors  of  humanity  engaged  in  it,  should  be  able 
to  bring  to  pass  actively  and  speedily  the  realization  of  their 
highest  ideals.”  (Applause.) 

FESTIVAL  HYMN Dudley  Buck 

O Peace ! on  thine  upsoaring  pinion, 

Thro’  the  world  thine  onward  flight  taking, 

Teach  the  nations  their  turmoil  forsaking, 

To  seek  thine  eternal  dominion. 

From  the  Infinite  Father  descending, 

O come  with  thine  influence  tender ; 

And  show  us  how  duly  to  render, 

To  Him  our  glad  praise  never  ending. 

O Music ! thy  source,  too,  is  holy, 

Thro’  thy  pow’r  ev’ry  heart  now  uniting ; 

With  thy  magic  each  true  soul  delighting, 

Blessed  bond  ’twixt  the  high  and  the  lowly. 

Thro’  thee,  the  great  Father  adoring, 

Thy  language  is  known  to  each  nation, 

Thro’  thee,  the  vast  Hymn  of  Creation, 

From  tongues  without  number  outpouring. 


175 

O Music!  O Peace! 

Happy  blending  of  voices  and  hearts, 

Of  voices  and  hearts  in  sweet  lays : 

In  this  union,  to  God’s  holy,  praise, 

Ever  thus  your  pure  influence  lending. 

Jehovah!  thou  Sov’reign  of  nations! 

Sweet  Peace  to  our  land  Thou  hast  granted, 

Be  Thy  praises  eternally  chanted, 

In  Music  forevermore ! 

Jehovah!  thou  Sov’reign  of  nations! 

Sweet  Peace  to  our  land  Thou  hast  granted, 

Be  Thy  praises  eternally  chanted, 

In  Music  forevermore. 

Aye ! forevermore,  aye,  forevermore, 

In  Music  forevermore. 

Amen ! Amen ! Amen ! Amen ! 

Dr.  Maxwell  : 

The  next  address  will  be  made  by  a gentleman  whom  we 
all  delight  to  honor,  a Senator  of  France,  and  a member  of  the 
International  Board  of  Arbitration  of  The  Hague,  President  of 
the  French  Branch  of  the  Interparliamentary  Union,  who 
comes  to  us  as  a representative  of  a sister  Republic  on  the  other 
side  of  the  Atlantic,  the  land  of  Lafayette.  (Applause.)  I 
have  the  honor  to  present  to  you  Baron  d’Estournelles  de 
Constant. 


National  Understanding 

Baron  d’Estournelles  de  Constant. 

(First  addressing  the  children  in  French.) 

You  ask  me  to  speak  English.  Is  it  possible?  That  isn’t 
nice,  you  know.  It  is  much  more  difficult  to  speak  English  than 
French.  Then,  why  do  you  oblige  me  to  speak  English?  You 
could  very  well  listen  to  me  speaking  French.  Let  me  tell  you 
very  frankly,  as  a friend  of  children,  I think  it  is  a little  selfish 
to  ask  me  to  speak  in  your  own  language  and  refuse  my  poor 
French.  But  suppose  that  I could  not  speak  English  and  that 
you  would  not  speak  French,  what  would  be  the  result  of  that? 
With  all  my  good  feelings  for  you,  and  with  all  your  good  feel- 
ings for  me,  if  we  could  not  understand  each  other  there  would 


176 

be  an  enormous  distance  between  you,  dear  children,  and  me, 
and  between  all  the  good  people  and  the  good  children  of  my 
country.  I never  felt  that  as  I do  to-day.  If  we  live  each  one 
for  himself,  and  don’t  take  the  trouble  to  learn  the  language  of 
other  countries,  what  will  the  result  be?  The  result  will  be 
that  we  will  get  into  a misunderstanding ; instead  of  Peace 
we  will  have  quarrels ; that  is  very  easy  to  explain.  Suppose 
people  tell  you  that  Baron  d’Estournelles  is  a very  bad  man,  that 
he  speaks  in  French  very  bad  things  which  you  do  not  under- 
stand, then  you  will  be  angry  with  him,  and  that  may  be  the 
beginning  of  a war.  (Laughter.) 

My  dear  friends,  you  are  laughing,  but  I am  sorry  to  say  it 
is  generally  from  that  that  war  begins.  It  is  simply  because 
people  do  not  understand  each  other.  (Applause.)  You  will 
understand  in  perfection  when  I say  that  if  my  children,  who 
are  like  you  children,  exactly  the  same,  and  they  would  be  so 
pleased  to  be  here  in  your  presence  and  to  sing  with  you, — if 
my  children  read  in  the  French  newspaper  that  the  American 
children  instead  of  singing  of  Peace  are  singing  of  war,  that  they 
are  very  bad  children,  very  quarrelsome,  of  course  my  children 
will  be  very  sorry;  but  they  will  say,  we  are  obliged  to  go  to  war 
with  these  American  children.  If  you  see  the  same  thing  in  the 
paper,  the  American  newspaper,  about  the  French  children,  or 
the  English  children,  or  the  German  children,  of  course  you  will 
think  them  very  bad,  if  you  do  not  know ; and  you  may  not  know 
because  an  ocean,  a big  ocean,  separates  our  two  nations.  It  is 
easy  to  have  a misunderstanding  when  people,  when  children  do 
not  understand  each  other’s  language. 

I remember  very  well,  and  can  give  you  a few  instances  of 
that.  England,  you  know  as  well  as  I do,  is  not  far  from  France, 
only  one  hour  across  in  a boat;  still,  do  you  know  that  the 
English  children  used  to  believe,  only  ten  or  twenty  years  ago, 
that  every  young  Frenchman  lived  upon  frogs  only ! When  they 
were  speaking  of  the  French  boys  at  school  they  called  them 
“frog-eaters.”  (Laughter.)  And  in  France  they  believed  things 
like  that  about  the  English  boys,  and  it  was  a kind  of  foolish 
fashion  to  think  it  was  not  patriotic  to  learn  the  language  of  other 
nations. 

I am  thinking  of  a good  instance.  I had  a very  good  friend 
of  mine,  a very  good  fellow,  an  Englishman,  who  has  a little 


From  Stereograph,  Copyright  1907,  by  Underwood  & Underwood,  New  York. 


177 

boy  like  you — I mean  a good  little  boy — and  that  little  boy  when 
he  was  only  seven  years  old  was  able  to  speak  French;  although 
he  was  an  English  boy,  he  was  able  to  speak  French  like  a 
Frenchman.  He  was  very  proud  of  that,  and  his  father  was 
proud  of  it,  too.  I was  a friend  of  his  father’s ; I felt  so  pleased, 
too,  I said,  “He  speaks  like  a Frenchman,  and  very  well.”  He 
was  living  in  France,  but  the  time  came  to  send  him  to  school 
at  home,  and  so  they  sent  him  to  an  English  school.  This  poor, 
nice  little  boy  began  talking  in  French,  thinking  all  the  sch®lars 
would  be  pleased  to  hear  him  speak  so  well — not  at  all;  they 
found  something  barbaric  in  his  way  of  speaking  French,  because 
it  wasn’t  the  usual  English  way.  They  said,  “He  is  speaking 
French  with  a French  accent.”  Then  the  poor  little  boy  was 
so  miserable  and  thought  he  could  never  be  happy  any  more  with 
that  bad  French  accent,  so  he  worked  hard  for  one  or  two  years, 
and  at  last  he  was  quite  happy — he  had  forgotten  his  French. 
Isn't  it  a pity,  my  children,  but  it  is  a fact — you  know  it  is 
a fact — that  if  you  believe  the  people  who  do  not  know,  you  will 
learn  nothing.  When  you  learn  something  new,  they  will  try 
to  abuse  you ; they  will  say  it  is  quite  useless  and  unpatriotic 
to  learn  French.  But  you  must  learn  French  and  other  lan- 
guages to  travel,  to  be  able  to  express  yourselves,  to  be  able  to 
make  yourselves  understood  everywhere,  to  try  to  help  others 
and  be  helped  in  case  of  need.  If  I had  not  been  able  to  speak 
English — if  I had  not  been  able  to  do  that — well,  what  would 
have  been  the  use  of  my  coming  here ! I should  have  been 
in  America,  but  I should  have  seen  nothing  of  America.  I 
should  have  been  quite  unable  to  understand  anybody,  and  then 
I should  have  to  go  back  to  my  country  in  ignorance — not  your 
ignorance,  but  my  own,  which  would  have  covered  me.  I under- 
stand that  my  duty  is  to  understand  and  to  speak  English.  Well, 
I cannot  tell  you  how  happy  I am  now  that  I shall  be  able  to 
tell  my  boys  and  my  girls  so  many  fine  stories  of  America. 

I will  tell  them  what  good  boys  you  are,  and  what  good 
girls  you  are,  and  what  a splendid  school  organization  you  have. 
You  do  not  understand  that,  because  you  have  not  compared, 
but  these  children’s  manifestations  are  something  that  we  do 
not  have  in  Europe.  This  is  the  beginning  of  a general,  not  only 
national,  but  international  education,  which  will  be  splendid  not 
only  for  your  country  but  for  the  whole  world. 


12 


i78 

I give  you  my  best  congratulations  and  the  expression  of 
my  deepest  gratitude  for  the  noble  characters  of  the  great 
citizens,  not  only  of  America  but  of  the  world,  who  have  given 
to  you  such  a fine  organization.  (Applause.) 

My  dear  children,  I can  tell  you  that  I should  know  nothing 
of  this  if  I had  not  been  able  to  know  through  my  English  what 
is  being  done  here  in  America,  and  what  is  quite  unknown  in 
France.  We  have  spoken  a great  deal  of  the  American  energy, 
American  initiative,  but  we  know  nothing  about  the  American 
family.  But  I have  been  able  to  speak  to  the  children;  I have 
spoken  with  children  in  the  families  of  my  friends  in  Pittsburg, 
Chicago,  Washington  and  in  New  York,  and  I must  tell  you 
that  perhaps  the  deepest  impression  made  on  me  during  this 
visit  is  that  I met  the  family  of  the  President  of  this  great 
Republic,  the  children  of  the  President,  Theodore  Roosevelt. 
(Applause.)  He  asked  me  to  come  to  see  them — that  was  quite 
unexpected — his  children  were  in  the  nursery  at  the  time ; he 
came  to  my  room  and  said,  “Come  and  see  the  children.”  I 
went  to  see  the  children,  and  there  I found  that  those  children 
were  as  good  and  nice  as  my  own  children — as  good  as  the  chil- 
dren in  all  countries ; there  is  no  difference.  They  were  per- 
haps not  very  serious ; I must  say  that  some  of  them  played 
tricks  even  on  me.  I tell  you  that  one  of  them  offered  me 
so-called  sweets  in  an  empty  box.  Another  one  of  them  put  in 
my  pocket  a guinea-pig.  Nevertheless,  you  know,  I found  they 
were  exactly  like  my  children,  and  so  I knew  about  the  American 
family.  I made  a discovery  also  about  the  President  of  the 
Republic.  Of  course  his  great  service  to  this  country  is  known 
all  over  the  world,  but  when  I saw  him  surrounded  by  all  his 
devoted  friends,  and  by  his  good  family,  I knew  something  still 
more  than  the  President  of  the  United  States,  I knew  the  man ; 
and  I can  tell  you  that  one  of  the  most  respected,  one  of  the 
best  men  I have  ever  met  is  your  President.  (Applause.) 

My  dear  little  friends,  and  my  dear  friends,  I tell  you  that 
next  time  when  I come  I will  speak  in  French  and  you  will  have 
to  answer  me.  (Applause.) 

Dr.  Maxwell: 

The  next  in  order  on  the  program  is  a salute  to  the  Ameri- 
can flag  by  all  the  children  in  the  audience.  The  ceremony 


179 

observed  will  shadow  forth  the  relations  that  exist  between  the 
State  and  the  city  on  the  one  hand  and  the  National  Govern- 
ment on  the  other.  I shall  have  to  ask  all  the  friends  sitting  on 
the  front  of  the  platform  to  vacate  their  seats  during  the  salute. 
All  the  audience  will  kindly  join  with  us  in  singing. 

(A  color  guard  of  boys  then  appeared  upon  the  stage,  with 
the  City,  State  and  National  colors.  The  National  flag  was 
saluted  by  all  the  public  school  children  present,  using  the  follow- 
ing words :) 

PLEDGE  OF  ALLEGIANCE — “I  pledge  allegiance  to  my  flag 
and  to  the  Republic  for  which  it  stands.  One  Nation, 
indivisible,  with  Liberty  and  Justice  to  all.” 

“Nation  with  Nation,  land  with  land, 

Unarmed  shall  live  as  comrades  free.” 

SONG — “Flag  of  the  Free” Chorus  and  Audience 

Flag  of  the  free,  fairest  to  see ! 

Far  from*,  the  strife  and  the  thunder  of  war; 

Banner  so  bright  with  starry  light, 

Float  ever  proudly  from  mountain  to  shore. 

Emblem  of  freedom,  hope  to  the  slave, 

Spread  thy  fair  folds  but  to  shield  and  to  save, 

While  thro’  the  sky  loud  rings  the  cry, 

Union  and  liberty ! One  evermore ! 

Dr.  Maxwell  : 

Before  introducing  the  next  speaker  I wish  to  call  upon 
the  Committee  of  Arrangements  to  read  a letter  received  from 
the  Rev.  Dr.  Edward  Everett  Hale,  possibly  the  oldest  clergyman 
in  active  service  in  the  United  States. 

Miss  Pierson: 

Dr.  Hale  regrets  that  he  cannot  be  present  with  us  to-day, 
but  has  sent  this  message  of  love  and  good-will  and  hope : 

“Please  express  to  the  young  people  my  regret 
that  I am  prevented  from  being  at  their  meeting.  If 
I came  I should  try  to  say  something  to  remind  Ameri- 
can boys  and  girls  that  we  all  owe  almost  all  we  have  to 
the  Union  of  the  States,  where  every  citizen  of  these 


i8o 


States  has  the  same  right  as  every  other  citizen.  By 
the  time  you  grow  up  to  be  men  and  women,  and  take 
your  places  in  the  world — in  the  United  States  of  the 
world, — the  thousand  grievances  and  difficulties  such  as 
your  fathers  and  mothers  have  suffered  will  be  done 
away  with. 

“I  remain,  very  truly  yours, 

(Signed)  “Edward  Everett  Hale.” 

Dr.  Maxwell  : 

The  next  address  will  be  upon  “Young  America  and  World- 

Peace.”  I have  the  pleasure  of  introducing  Rabbi  Stephen  S. 

Wise. 


Young  America  and  World-Peace 

Rabbi  Stephen  S.  Wise. 

In  1492,  in  a little  town  in  Germany,  there  lived  a school- 
master, who,  every  morning,  as  he  crossed  the  threshold  of  his 
class-room,  very  reverently  bowed  before  the  assembled  children. 
When  he  was  asked  the  reason  for  his  act,  he  replied : “Because 
the  young  boys  now  seated  before  me  will  in  the  years  to  come 
be  the  physicians,  the  lawyers,  the  priests,  the  burgomasters,  the 
chancellors  of  the  nation.”  One  of  the  boys  to  whom  John 
Trebonius  was  wont  to  bow  became  one  of  the  great  figures  of 
history — Martin  Luther. 

To-day,  in  the  spirit  of  John  Trebonius,  we,  the  teachers  and 
parents  of  the  Republic,  by  delegates  assembled,  turn  to  you 
young  Americans,  to  you  who  are  the  heirs  of  the  ages,  to  you 
standing  in  the  foremost  files  of  time,  to  you  who  will  be  the 
masters  of  to-morrow  as  we  are  the  arbiters  of  to-day.  Rever- 
ently we  bow  before  you,  and,  knowing  that  our  hopes  will  be  in* 
vain  unless  you  choose  to  continue  and  magnify  the  work  of  this 
hour,  we  ask  you,  we  adjure  you  to  help  the  cause  of  the  world’s 
peace,  which  is  the  cause  of  international  justice  and  interna- 
tional right-doing.  (Applause.)  We,  the  elders  here  gathered, 
will  soon  be  gone,  but  you,  our  children,  will  long  survive  us. 
and  as  we  think  of  our  high  cause  and  look  upon  you,  younger 


i8i 

brothers  and  sisters  of  Washington,  Lincoln,  Roosevelt,  we  are 
moved  to  exclaim  with  the  poet : 

“For  earth’s  best  hopes  rest  all  with  thee.” 

No  need  to  ask  you  to  be  true  to  the  flag,  for  you  are  Ameri- 
can girls  and  boys.  For  the  same  reason,  because  you  are  repre- 
sentatives of  young  America,  we  expect  you  to  be  true  to  the 
sacred  trust  to  which  you  are  committed  by  the  word  and  song 
of  this  hour. 

To  you,  the  youth  of  America,  we  address  our  appeal, 
because  to-morrow  you  will  be  the  sovereigns  of  this  democracy 
which  knows  no  other  sovereignty  than  its  citizenship.  (Ap- 
plause.) 

You  may  ask  me  this  afternoon:  “What  can  we  young 
Americans  do  in  behalf  of  peace?  Is  not  World-Peace  merely  a 
dream?”  I answer:  America,  this  American  democracy,  was  a 
dream  until  your  fathers  made  it  real.  You  ask  me:  “Can  the 
way  leading  to  Peace  be  traveled  without  arduous  pioneering?” 
I answer:  “The  American  is  a pioneer  by  virtue  alike  of  the 
heritage  of  his  history  and  his  destiny.”  The  Pilgrim  Fathers 
were  pioneers.  The  men  who  settled  Jamestown  three  hundred 
years  ago  were  pioneers.  Lewis  and  Clark,  who  won  a con- 
tinent for  their  country  without  shedding  one  drop  of  human 
blood,  were  pioneers.  Young  Americans,  yours  it  is  to  be  pio- 
neers in  every  true  and  high  cause  of  the  world. 

You  ask  me  finally:  “What  can  we,  Young  America,  achieve 
in  the  cause  of  Peace?”  Let  me  remind  you  that  this  is  not  the 
first  International  Peace  Congress  held  upon  American  soil. 
There  was  another  Peace  and  Arbitration  Congress  held  two 
years  ago  at  Portsmouth,  which  ended  one  of  the  bloodiest  wars 
in  history  and  brought  Peace  to  two  hundred  millions  of  people 
in  Russia  and  Japan.  That  Arbitration  Congress  and  that  Peace 
were  made  possible  by  the  courage  and  statesmanship  of  a one- 
time New  York  boy — Theodore  Roosevelt.  (Cries  of  Hip!  Hip! 
Hurrah ! were  echoed  by  the  boys  in  the  chorus.) 

Again,  I say  unto  you  that  you  can  do  everything  in  the 
cause  of  Peace.  Remember  that  in  this  land  of  ours  all  the  races, 
all  the  peoples,  all  the  faiths  of  the  world  are  being  brought 
together  and  are  being  fused  into  one  great  and  indivisible  whole, 
as  if  to  prove  that,  if  men  will  but  come  near  enough  together 


182 


to  know  one  another,  whatever  their  nationality,  their  race,  their 
religion,  hatred  and  ill-will  and  prejudice  and  all  uncharitable- 
ness are  sure  to  pass  away.  Herein  let  America  pioneer.  Our 
country  seems  destined  in  the  Providence  of  God  to  be  the  meet- 
ing-place of  all  the  peoples,  to  be  the  world’s  experimental 
station  in  brotherhood' — all  of  us  learning  that  other  nations  are 
not  barbarians,  that  other  races  are  not  inferior,  that  other  faiths 
are  not  Godless.  War  will  be  and  must  be  as  long  as  we  hate 
the  stranger.  We  are  to  teach  the  world  that  moral,  not  military, 
preparedness  makes  war  inevitable,  as  moral  preparedness  for 
Peace  makes  war  impossible.  He  is  no  true  Christian  who  har- 
bors hatred  of  a Jew  in  his  heart.  (Applause.)  He  is  no  true 
American  who  cherishes  ill-will  toward  German  or  Frenchman 
or  Englishman  or  Austrian. 

I turn  to  you,  teachers  of  the  land,  and  urge  your  higher 
duty.  You  are  not  to  teach  history  as  if  the  American  Revolu- 
tion had  not  yet  ended  or  had  ended  yesterday.  It  ended  more 
than  one  hundred  years  ago.  Instead  of  execrating  King  George 
and  Lord  North  in  our  classrooms,  let  us  in  the  great  American 
cities  raise  monuments  in  gratitude  to  Pitt,  who  in  the  House  of 
Lords,  said:  “I  contend  not  for  indulgence  but  for  justice  to 
America”  (applause),  and  to  Edmund  Burke,  who  thundered  at 
the  House  of  Commons,  “ I do  not  know  the  method  of  drawing 
up  an  indictment  against  a whole  people.”  Let  us  forget  with 
charity  the  Union’s  foes  across  the  sea  in  the  days  of  civil  strife, 
and  remember  with  gratitude  John  Bright,  friend  of  the  Union, 
and  Queen  Victoria,  our  truest  friend  in  the  dark  years  of 
’6i-’65.  (Applause.) 

I close  by  reminding  you  that,  after  the  Battle  of  Koenig- 
gratz  had  been  won  by  the  Germans,  Bismarck  said : “The  school- 
master has  conquered.”  I say  to  you  to-day  that  the  greater  con- 
quest of  the  school-master  begins  in  this  hour.  The  school-master 
and  his  pupils  have  nobly  conquered  when  the  Peace  of  justice 
and  righteousness  shall  obtain  in  the  world. 

Beautiful  ever  is  our  flag,  but  never,  never,  never  has  our 
flag  seemed  as  beautiful  as  to-day,  surrounded  by  the  flags  of 
the  nations  and  bordered  by  the  stainless  white  of  Peace  and  love 
and  brotherhood.  Under  the  inspiration  of  this  hour,  do  you, 


183 

young  America,  highly  resolve  touching  the  flags  of  the  nations, 
in  the  words  of  Tennyson: 

“Our  flags  together  furled, 

Henceforward  no  other  strife, 

Than  which  of  us  most  shall  help  the  world, 

Which  lead  the  noblest  life.” 

Dr.  Maxwell  : 

The  next  address  will  be  “The  Struggle  for  Life  and 
Peace.”  I have  pleasure  in  presenting  to  you  Dr.  James  Walsh, 
of  St.  John’s  College,  Fordham. 


The  Struggle  for  Life  and  Peace 

James  J.  Walsh,  M.D. 

Unfortunately  the  idea  has  become  prevalent  in  modern 
times  that  Peace  is  not  a normal  condition  among  living  things, 
but  that  evolution  has  been  brought  about  by  means  of  the 
struggle  for  life.  This  idea  had  been  transferred  to  human 
affairs,  and  the  strong  man  has  excused  his  selfishness  on  the 
plea  that  it  was  but  natural  for  him  to  conquer  others  and  that 
in  the  course  of  time  the  weaker  must  inevitably  go  to  the  wall. 
The  principle  has  even  seemed  to  justify  the  struggle  between 
bodies  of  men  for  supremacy  or  for  territory  and  to  provide 
opportunities  for  the  stronger  nations.  Even  war  was  supposed 
to  have  some  justification  on  this  principle.  The  struggle  for 
life,  however,  is  not  a more  potent  factor  in  biology  than  is 
mutual  aid.  The  study  of  mutual  aid  shows  how  much  has 
been  accomplished  by  means  of  it.  There  is  practically  never  a 
war  to  the  death  between  individuals  of  the  same  species  in 
biology.  On  the  contrary,  they  are  always  found  to  be  helping 
one  another.  It  is  true  that  when  men  make  them  solitary  by 
persecuting  them,  they  lose  some  of  their  social  instincts,  but 
these  exist  in  profusion  among  the  animals  in  a state  of  nature. 
One  needs  only  to  go  to  Yellowstone  Park  to  see  how  the 
animals  herd  together  in  communities  without  interfering  with 
one  another,  to  see  even  how  they  play,  for  play  is  a characteristic 
of  the  animals  in  a state  of  nature;  to  be  convinced  that  the 
so-called  struggle  for  life,  in  as  far  as  it  refers  to  individuals  of 


184 

the  same  species,  is  a myth.  On  the  contrary,  probably  the  most 
interesting  phase  of  modern  biology  is  the  study  of  the  social 
instincts  of  the  animals.  Careful  observation  shows  that  they 
are  constantly  ready  to  help  one  another.  This  is  true  from  the 
lowest  to  the  highest.  The  ant  because  of  his  social  instincts  is 
considered  by  many  conservative  scientific  students  as  the 
creature  nearest  to  man  in  the  exhibition  of  intelligence.  The 
bee  occupies  a place  only  a little  lower  in  the  scale  because  of 
its  similar  social  qualities.  Elephants  in  the  jungle  always  live 
together  in  herds,  and  it  is  well  known  that  this  is  for  protective 
and  feeding  purposes.  All  through  the  animal  creation,  however, 
this  same  thing  is  found.  Fishes  in  the  sea  live  in  schools,  and 
though,  perhaps,  to  youth,  school  may  not  seem  a good  term  for 
the  pleasant  ways  of  the  wandering  groups  of  fishes,  who  go 
where  they  will  or  fancy  leads,  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  the 
root  of  the  word  school  is  from  a Greek  derivative  which  means 
leisure.  This  would  eminently  accord  with  the  ways  of  the 
fishes,  and  perhaps  would  hint  how  knowledge  should  really  be 
obtained  to  those  who  take  school  too  seriously  and  over-strenu- 
ously.  All  the  birds  live  in  flocks,  especially  when  they  migrate 
from  one  part  of  the  country  to  another  and  are  more  likely  to 
meet  enemies  on  the  way.  The  parrots,  wise  creatures,  have  such 
close  communion  among  themselves  that  even  the  old  birds  are 
faithfully  protected  from  enemies,  and  it  is  said  that  in  their 
native  haunts  most  parrots  die  of  old  age.  Wild  horses  live 
together  in  herds;  and  the  domestic  cow  drifts  so  naturally  into 
herds  as  to  make  it  sure  that  this  is  a primitive  instinct.  Our 
herds  of  bison  on  the  plains  succeeded  thus  in  protecting  them- 
selves from  enemies  as  a single  animal  or  even  family  group 
could  not  have  done.  The  herds  of  animals  are  always  most 
closely  associated  at  the  time  of  the  year  when,  because  of  the 
presence  of  many  young,  such  protection  is  needed.  Even  the 
seals,  though  we  are  not  apt  to  think  of  them  as  wise  creatures 
at  all,  live  together  in  herds.  Fierce  as  are  the  wolves  and 
ready  as  they  may  be  to  take  advantage  of  one  another,  they 
hunt  in  packs,  partly  because  they  have  realized  that  thus  they 
can  get  their  prey  better,  but  partly  also  because  of  the  feeling 
that  they  are  thus  more  readily  protected  from  their  enemies. 

Shall  it  be  that  only  man  still  maintains  the  principle  that 
might'  makes  right  ? He  is  supposed  to  have  reason  while  the 


i8s 

animals  have  something  less.  All  the  best  feelings  of  man  have 
been  taken  advantage  of  in  order  to  force  him  to  war.  The 
unselfishness  necessary  in  a single  campaign,  if  spread  over  many 
years,  would  make  a nation  happy.  Men  forget  themselves 
entirely  and  think  only  of  others  and  of  duty.  Think  of  the 
opportunities  of  applying  this  magnificent  forgetfulness  of  self 
for  the  cause  that  is  supposed  to  be  great,  to  the  great  cause  of 
humanity  itself  and  its  advancement.  What  progress  might  we 
not  look  for?  Let  us  get  rid  of  the  notion,  then,  that  the  struggle 
for  life  in  a species  itself  ever  conduces  to  development.  This 
is  a mistaken  notion  quite  apart  from  the  realities  of  biological 
science  as  founded  upon  observation. 

Dr.  Maxwell: 

Baron  d’Estournelles  has  a word  to  say, 

Baron  d’Estournelles: 

My  dear  friends,  I think  now,  as  you  are  so  unanimous 
in  the  impression  we  have  all  received  on  this  great  day,  and 
which  we  never  shall  forget,  I think  we  ought  to  do  something — 
something  nice,  I mean — no  I am  not  quite  right — “we”  ought 
not  to  do  it, — “you”  ought  to  do  it,  you  little  children. 

What  I propose,  with  the  kind  permission  of  the  Chair- 
man, is  that  as  we  have  been  speaking  of  the  children,  and 

of  the  great  son  of  New  York,  and  the  children  of  President 

Roosevelt,  you  should  send  a telegram,  a message  of  your 
sympathy  to  them.  I am  sure  they  will  be  extremely  pleased, 

and  touched,  and  happy  to  see  that  you  appreciate  what  their 

father  has  done  for  Peace.  (Applause.) 

Dr.  Maxwell: 

AJ1  the  children  of  New  York  who  are  in  favor  of  sending  a 
message  to  the  children  of  President  Roosevelt  will  please  raise 
their  hands.  (Seemingly  every  child  in  the  hall  raised  his  hand 
and  Chairman  Maxwell  said  “Unanimously  carried.”) 

The  pleasure  is  now  mine  to  present  to  you,  Senorita  Huido- 
bro,  recently  of  Chili,  who  will  tell  us  about  the  colossal  Monu- 
ment of  Peace  on  the  crest  of  the  Andes. 


1 86 


The  Christ  of  the  Andes 

How  the  Great  Statue  of  the  Saviour  was  Set  Up  as  a Peace 
Memorial  Between  Chili  and  Argentina. 

Senorita  Carolina  Huidobro. 

“Sooner  shall  these  mountains  crumble  to  dust  than  Argen- 
tines and  Chilians  break  the  peace  which  at  the  feet  of  Christ  the 
Redeemer  they  have  sworn  to  maintain !” 

The  inauguration  of  the  monument  of  Christ  the  Redeemer, 
on  the  Cordillera  of  the  Andes6 — a monument  of  International 
Peace  (the  first  in  history)  between  Chili  and  Argentina — has  a 
grand  significance  at  once  political  and  social. 

The  colossal  statue  upon  that  pinnacle,  14,450  feet  above 
the  sea,  surrounded  by  peaks  of  perpetual  snow,  dominates 
the  two  countries  of  Argentina  and  Chili,  whose  people 
have  been  nurtured  in  the  same  cradle  and  whose  history  is  one, 
though  they  had  been  long  blinded  by  foolish  antagonisms.  Now 
they  can  look  up  the  mountain  and  realize  the  lesson  of  Peace,  of 
that  supreme  law — “Love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself.”  The  Divine 
Master  Jesus,  the  Jew,  the  personification  of  concord  and  love, 
points  out  to  the  two  republics  their  future  path,  and  the  love 
which  will  make  of  humanity  in  the  generations  to  come,  one 
world-wide  family,  and  the  whole  earth  the  home  of  Peace ! 

In  1898,  when  an  outbreak  of  the  old  hostility  between  the 
two  nations  seemed  imminent,  through  the  mediation  of  Queen 
Victoria  peace  was  restored  between  Chili  and  Argentine.  For 
over  seventy  years  there  had  been  constantly  recurring  disputes 
relating  to  the  true  boundary  lines  between  the  two  republics. 
But  the  people  were  only  half  satisfied  with  the  mediation;  the 
feeling  of  jealousy  and  hate  had  not  been  fully  smothered,  and 
it  only  required  a spark  to  rekindle  the  old  flame.  In  1900,  the 
desire  to  prove  to  themselves  and  to  the  world  which  was  the 
stronger  nation,  seemed  to  have  gained  ground.  Both  had  pre- 
pared for  war.  Chili  and  Argentina  both  had  spent  millions, 
and  were  equipped  with  the  destructive  inventions  of  modern 
warfare;  each  nation  seemed  ready  to  fly  at  the  other,  while  the 
press  of  both  countries,  with  rare  exceptions,  was  discussing 
the  comparative  prowess  of  the  two- nations,  even  going  so  far  as 
to  speculate  which  had  the  better  fighting  chance.  About  this 


i8  7 

time  the  Argentine  Bishop  of  An  jo,  Monsenor  Benevente,  gave 
public  expression  to  an  idea  which  caught  the  hearts  of  both 
nations.  He  spoke  for  International  Peace,  and  suggested  a 
statue  of  Christ,  to  be  placed  at  Puente  del  Inca,  a station  on  the 
Transandean  railways,  10,000  feet  above  the  sea.  Here  it  could 
be  seen  by  all  travelers.  He  urged  that  the  countries  should 
settle  their  ancient  quarrels  forever,  and  erect  on  the  snowy 
borderland  “A  colossal  bronze  figure  of  the  Prince  of  Peace,  to 
record  a treaty  of  Love  and  Peace,  that  could  be  considered  as  a 
perpetual  obligation,  to  be  transmitted  to  the  generations  yet  to 
come.”  He  urged  it  also  as  a means  of  “tempering  all  ardor  for 
war,  and  dispelling  all  prejudices  between  the  Atlantic  and  the 
Pacific.” 

Deep  in  the  hearts  of  the  Chilians  this  thought  took  root. 
The  young  Argentine  sculptor,  Senor  Mateo  Alonso,  was  selected 
for  the  work,  and  after  a time  the  statue  was  cast  in  the  Arsenal 
of  Buenos  Ayres,  from  bronze  cannon  which  had  been  taken  at 
the  time  Argentina  was  fighting  for  her  independence  against 
Spain. 

The  year  1902  was  fast  coming  to  a close,  and,  notwithstand- 
ing the  signing  of  two  treaties  (May  28th  and  July  nth)  regard- 
ing the  disputed  territory  of  Patagonia,  the  statue  was  no  nearer 
leaving  its  place  in  the  yard  of  the  College  of  Lacordaire,  than 
if  it  had  never  been  cast.  Meanwhile  the  foreign  diplomats, 
the  church  and  the  women  of  Chili  and  Argentina,  worked  un- 
tiringly for  the  cause  of  Peace.  The  press  was  less  bellicose  in 
its  attitude,  and  throughout  both  lands  pulsated  the  impression 
of  better  days  coming.  Material  and  economic  considerations 
spoke  to  the  hearts  of  the  men  of  business.  The  two  nations 
talked  things  over,  with  the  result  that,  in  May,  1903,  the  cruiser 
Chacabuco  left  Valparaiso,  carrying  the  treaties  of  peace  and  the 
delegates  for  their  consummation. 

What  pen  or  tongue  can  describe  the  scene  which  presented 
itself  as,  escorted  by  the  whole  Argentine  fleet,  decked  to  the 
mizzen  with  bunting,  and  joined  at  Buenos  Ayres  by  3,000  ships, 
1,000  of  them  steamers  in  gala  array,  the  Ship  of  Peace  slowly 
made  its  way  to  the  dock,  where  stood  the  representatives  of  the 
sister  nation,  ready  to  extend  the  hand  of  welcome.  On  the 
2 1st  of  May,  1903,  for  the  first  time  a Chilian  man-of-war  was 
publicly  welcomed  and  made  fast  to  the  soil  of  Argentina.  King 


1 88 

Edward  had  sent  his  representative,  Sir  Thomas  Holdich,  as  arbi- 
trator, with  full  instructions  to  “make  Peace  with  Honor,  if  pos- 
sible to  do  so.”  The  Chilean  and  Argentine  delegates  at  the 
preliminary  meeting  addressed  the  King,  through  Sir  Thomas 
Holdich,  in  these  words : 

“In  your  hands  we  place  ourselves,  shutting  our  eyes  to  all 
mean  and  narrow  thoughts,  and  praying  God  that  we  shall  open 
them  upon  the  luminous  horizon  of  an  honorable  Peace.” 

Buenos  Ayres,  from  May  21st  to  June  3d,  was  a round  of 
entertainments,  banquets  and  fireworks;  every  one  was  celebrat- 
ing, feeling  sure  that  those  interested  in  the  fate  of  the  na- 
tions would  proclaim  Peace  once  more.  When  the  final  result 
of  the  meeting  of  the  delegates  in  the  Palace  of  Industries  became 
public,  “joy  was  unconfined.” 

But  something  more  beautiful  was  yet  to  come.  It  was  the 
inspiration  of  Senora  Angela  de  Oliviera  Cezar  de  Costa  to 
invite  personally  President  Roca  of  Argentina,  and  the  delegates 
and  representatives  from  other  countries,  to  the  College  of 
Lacordaire,  to  inspect  the  great  statue  of  Christ,  which  in  the 
merrymaking  and  tumult  of  the  last  few  days  had  been  almost 
forgotten.  At  the  foot  of  the  statue  there  gathered  not  only  the 
churchmen  and  the  diplomatists,  but  the  mothers  of  Argentina. 

Senora  Costa,  in  a voice  trembling  with  emotion,  asked  that 
this  statue  of  the  Christ  be  placed  on  the  highest  accessible 
pinnacle  of  the  Andes,  between  the  two  republics,  as  a monument 
of  peace  between  Chilians  and  Argentines.  When  the  delegates 
left  the  college  yard  the  destiny  of  the  great  statue  was  assured. 

In  February,  1904,  steps  were  taken  toward  the  erection  of 
the  monument.  The  site  selected  is  over  14,000  feet  above  the 
sea,  on  a plateau  of  twelve  acres,  on  the  dividing  line  between 
Chili  and  Argentina  and  a short  distance  from  Portillo,  a station 
of  the  Transandean  Railway  which,  when  finished,  will  connect 
the  Atlantic  and  the  Pacific.  Senor  Mateo  Alonzo  personally 
directed  the  placing  of  the  huge  granite  blocks  which  serve  as  a 
pedestal.  Upon  these,  early  in  March,  1904,  the  statue  was 
placed.  The  figure  itself  is  twenty-six  feet  in  height.  The 
statue,  pedestal  and  base  were  carried  across  the  654  miles  by 
rail  to  Mendoza,  thence  80  miles  to  La  Cueras,  where  the  huge 
crates  were  transferred  to  gun-carriages,  for  the  journey  of 
many  miles  over  mountain  roads.  Soldiers  and  sailors  acted  as 


i8g 

guard  to  the  precious  burden.  In  many  instances,  fearing  that 
if  left  to  the  mules  to  draw  an  accident  might  happen,  these 
sturdy  men  took  the  ropes  themselves  and  drew  the  heavy 
carriages  over  those  Andean  roads  where  a false  step  might 
mean  inevitable  death. 

On  the  13th  of  March,  1904,  both  nations  participated  in  the 
final  exercises.  Hundreds  had  encamped  on  the  heights  the 
night  before.  The  Chilian  and  Argentine  representatives  arrived 
early,  and  found  already  waiting  there  the  military  and  naval 
forces  of  both  countries — the  Argentine  troops  occupying  Chilian 
territory  and  those  of  Chili  standing  upon  the  soil  of  Argentina. 
The  triumphant  march  of  these  armies  through  cities  and  towns 
had  not  been  marred  by  sadness  or  slaughter.  The  meeting  was 
solemn  and  affecting.  The  thunderous  roar  of  cannon  was 
rolled  along  those  great  mountains  until  the  echoes  were  lost  in 
the  distance.  Between  the  saluting  of  guns  there  arose  the  swell 
of  martial  music,  the  “dianas”  and  national  hymns  of  Chili  and 
Argentina.  There  were  loud  “vivas”  for  Chili  and  Argentina, 
for  the  cause  of  Peace,  and  for  Presidents  Roca  and  Riesco. 

This  interchange  of  mutual  good-will  was  followed  by  a 
religious  ceremonial,  offered  by  Archbishop  Espinosa  of  Argen- 
tina, and  at  n o’clock,  amid  profound  silence,  the  veil  was 
drawn  aside,  revealing  the  great  statue  to  the  assembled  multi- 
tude. It  was  then  formally  dedicated  “to  the  whole  world,  that 
from  here  a pinnacle  of  the  Andes,  it  may  take  a lesson  of  ‘Peace 
on  earth  and  good-will  to  men/  ” Eloquent  speeches  and  more 
music  followed,  and  just  before  sunset,  the  Argentine  priest, 
Senor  Cabrera,  pronounced  the  prayer  and  benediction : 

“Oh,  God,  will  it  that  war  shall  disappear.  Put 
out  fires  of  rivalry,  of  hate,  and  cause  to  reign 
among  men  concord  and  love.  Give  unto  the 
nations  peace,  benevolence  and  order;  and  to  such 
end  let  the  spirit  of  evil  be  broken,  let  the  dew  of 
Thy  loving  kindness  descend  upon  and  penetrate 
the  hearts  of  men — Thy  grace  fall  upon  all  men.” 

Chili  and  Argentina  have  not  only  created  a symbol,  they 
have  inculcated  into  the  minds  of  men  for  all  ages  an  idea  of 
greater  significance  than  any  other  in  our  contemporary  age — a 


i go 

colossal  monument  to  Peace,  with  the  inscription  on  its  granite 
pedestal : 

“Se  desplomaran  estas  montanas  antes  que 
Argentinos  and  Chilians  rompan  la  paz  jurada  a 
los  pies  del  Christo  Redontor — 

“Sooner  shall  these  mountains  crumble  to  dust 
than  Argentines  and  Chilians  break  the  Peace  which 
at  the  feet  of  Christ  the  Redeemer  they  have  sworn 
to  maintain.” 

On  the  other  side  of  the  base  are  the  words  of  the  angels’ 
song  over  Bethlehem : 

“PEACE  ON  EARTH,  GOOD-WILL  TO  MEN.” 

The  statue  cost  about  $100,000  and  was  paid  for  by  popular 
subscription,  the  working  classes  contributing  liberally. 

“Only  a bit  of  sentiment  by  an  emotional  people,”  says  the 
skeptic;  but  it  marks  not  a boast  or  a dream.  It  marks 
an  actual  achievement.  The  statue  had  not  been  standing  one 
year  when  Brazil  and  Bolivia  settled  the  long-standing  dispute 
over  the  rights  to  the  Acre  Territory — Brazil  giving  back  to 
Bolivia  the  whole  of  the  Territory,  together  with  $10,000,000, 
which  Bolivia  is  spending  on  railroads.  Chili  also  made  up  with 
Bolivia,  and  by  a Treaty  of  Peace  and  Friendship  put  an  end  to 
an  old  feud  of  twenty-six  years  standing.  Chili  is  now  aiding 
Bolivia  to  exploit  her  wealth  by  helping  her  build  railroads. 
Argentina  was  instrumental  in  quelling  a revolution  in  Uruguay 
— and  all  this,  as  I have  said,  in  less  than  a year  from  the  time 
that  lesson  came  down  from  the  Andean  height.  Surely,  “how 
beautiful  upon  the  mountains  are  the  feet  of  Him.”  Let  us 
thank  God  that  whatever  the  motives  which  prompted  the  natives, 
whatever  the  incentive  which  will  keep  it  alive,  Argentina  and 
Chili  have  already,  in  the  beginning  of  this  great  century,  cast 
the  first  vote  for  Universal  Peace ! They  have  surely  “ushered 
in  the  dawn  of  the  day  at  whose  meridian  Peace  will  become 
permanent.” 

Dr.  Maxwell: 

I will  now  introduce  to  you  the  last  speaker  of  the  after- 
noon, last  only  because  he  has  asked  that  he  might  be.  I 


igi 

promise  you  that  no  matter  how  weary  you  are  you  will  be  glad 
you  have  remained  to  hear  him. 

He  is  the  representative  of  that  land  from  which  we  have 
inherited  our  language,  from  which  we  have  inherited  the 
greater  part  of  our  literature,  from  which  we  have  inherited  our 
common  law,  and  many  of  our  social  and  political  institutions. 
He  is  Mr.  William  T.  Stead,  the  representative  of  England. 
(Applause.) 

What  Young  Folks  Can  Do 

Mr.  W.  T.  Stead. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Youth  of  New  York:  You  are  very 
tired,  I know,  and  I am  afraid  many  of  you  regard  my  appear- 
ance here  with  a sigh  of  regret  (cries  of  “no”  and  applause). 
You  are  very  complimentary,  my  friends,  but  I have  been  a boy 
myself,  and  I know  what  it  is.  (Applause.)  I am  glad  to 
meet  you  here  to-night,  because  I have  come  to  ask  for  your 
help.  I am  like  the  man  of  Macedonia  in  the  Gospel,  who  being 
seen  by  the  Apostle  in  a vision,  cried,  “Come  over  and  help  us.” 

Now,  you  may  think  that  a strange  request  from  a repre- 
sentative of  the  old  country  which  your  forefathers  whipped  so 
well  and  so  deservedly  (Applause),  more  than  a hundred  years 
ago,  and  in  so  doing,  conferred  upon  us  one  of  the  greatest 
advantages  we  ever  enjoyed  at  the  hands  of  any  nation  in  the 
whole  of  our  long  experience. 

I am  glad  to  meet  you  here  to-day.  Every  year  we  celebrate 
the  Fourth  of  July  at  my  brother’s  place  at  Browning  Hall  in 
London,  as  a great  British  festival.  And  we  always  claim,  and 
claim  with  truth,  that  George  Washington  was  the  best  English- 
man of  the  eighteenth  century.  He  was  English-born  and 
English-bred,  English-educated  and  English-trained.  Thank 
God  you  helped  him  lick  George  the  Third,  who  brought  German 
feudal  despotic  ideas  into  our  country.  (Applause.) 

Now,  I want  you  to  help  us  once  more.  We  don’t  want 
you  to  lick  us  again  (laughter),  but  we  want  you  to  lead  us  to 
victory  in  the  fields  of  Peace.  (Applause.) 

I confess  that  I came  here  rather  bowed  down  and 
depressed.  I had  been  appealing  to  an  elderly  American,  one  of 
the  best  Americans  on  this  great  continent;  I had  been  asking 


192 

him  whether  he  thought  it  was  not  possible  for  us  to  get 
together  twelve  representative  men  and  women,  representative  of 
the  best  of  your  countrymen  and  countrywomen,  to  lead  a great 
international  pilgrimage  of  Peace,  which,  starting  from  your 
country,  would  go  from  capital  to  capital  until  it  wound  up  at 
The  Hague,  thus  opening  the  way  to  a practical  program  of 
arbitration  and  progress. 

I am  sorry  to  tell  you  that  that  old  man,  old  saint,  I may 
almost  call  him,  said : “The  idea  is  splendid.  There  is  no 
doubt  that  it  would  have  a magnificent  effect,  that  such  a depu- 
tation coming  from  this  New  World  to  the  Old  World  would 
shake  the  Continent;  but  you  will  never  be  able  to  get  your 
pilgrims.  Americans  that  have  made  their  mark  as  international 
men,  Americans  that  are  famous  throughout  the  world,  are  too 
busy  or  too  much  employed,  or  too  much  afraid  of  ridicule,  to 
undertake  such  a mission.” 

I hesitated  and  my  heart  sank  within  me,  and  I walked 
down  to  this  Hall,  and  I saw  this  magnificent  assemblage  of 
youthful  Americans,  and  I heard  the  Chairman  read  the  sublime 
words  of  the  Hebrew  seer,  and  my  heart  gave  a great  leap  of 
joy,  and  I felt  that  an  opportunity  had  come  and  that  I would 
put  before  you,  young  boys  and  young  girls,  young  men  and 
young  women,  the  story  of  what  you  might,  what  you  can  and, 
if  God  wills,  what  I hope  you  will,  decide  to  do  this  day  to  aid 
the  cause  of  Peace,  Progress  and  Humanity.  (Applause.) 

“A  little  child  shall  lead  them.”  I forget  how  many  years 
ago  it  was  when  I stood  in  the  capital,  the  most  beautiful  of  all 
the  capitals,  the  glorious  city  of  Paris,  so  worthily  represented 
here  to-day  by  Baron  d’Estournelles  de  Constant.  (Applause.) 
I witnessed  a great  international  celebration.  Your  represen- 
tative was  there,  and  the  Foreign  Minister  of  England  was 
there,  and  the  head  of  the  Prussian  Government,  and  there  were 
soldiers  there,  and  all  the  representatives  of  the  Foreign  Powers 
were  gathered  there  in  a great  assemblage.  And  what  was  the 
cause  of  the  gathering?  It  was  to  celebrate  the  unveiling  of  the 
statue  of  Lafayette,  which  the  school  children  of  America  had 
given  to  France.  Lafayette  served  you,  and  served  you  well,  and 
you  were  not  ungrateful.  But  what  does  that  show?  It  shows 
that  there  exists  in  you  boys  and  girls  of  America  a power;  you 
can  make  its  intent  felt  upon  international  relations.  You,  by 


193 

your  cents  and  your  quarters,  made  an  impression  which  vibrated 
through  the  European  nations. 

Now,  if  you  could  do  that  by  giving  a statue  of  a War 
Hero,  what  can  you  not  do  if  you  determine  throughout  the 
whole  of  this  vast  Republic  to  join  together  your  contributions, 
in  order  to  provide  the  funds  for  the  carrying  out  of  one  of  the 
greatest  pilgrimages  that  the  world  has  ever  seen  in  the  interests 
of  Peace  and  International  Brotherhood.  (Applause.) 

The  Hague  Conference,  you  know,  is  going  to  meet  on  the 
fifteenth  of  June,  and  the  Hague  Conference  has  to  discuss 
many  things;  I am  not  going  to  tell  you  all  of  them,  only  of 
two  things  which  I think  the  Hague  Conference  will  do.  One 
is  to  protect  the  world  against  the  dreaded  sudden  outbreak  of 
war.  You  know  people  say  there  can  be  no  prevention  of  the 
sudden  outbreak  of  war,  that  in  the  darkness  of  night,  without 
any  declaration,  without  any  attempt  to  see  what  could  be  done 
to  avoid  it,  it  is  possible  for  war  to  be  declared.  Perhaps  you 
don’t  understand  it  fully,  because,  fortunately  for  you,  three 
thousand  miles  of  stormy  sea  lie  between  you  and  your  warlike 
neighbors.  But  when  the  frontiers  lie  as  close  together  as  they 
do  in  Europe  it  is  a very  different  story.  Frenchmen  told  me, 
when  1 was  in  Paris  last  year,  that  for  three  months  they  had 
expected  to  wake  up  in  the  morning  and  find  German  troops  in 
full  march  upon  Paris,  and  Germans  told  me  the  year  before 
that  they  had  long  been  in  suspense,  not  knowing  whether  the 
British  fleet  would  descend  on  Kiel,  burn  Kiel  and  sink  all  the 
German  ironclads.  So  you  can  understand  that  in  Europe  the 
dread  of  sudden  war  is  a very  great  one. 

Now,  there  is  a New  York  boy  you  have  been  hearing 
about,  Theodore  Roosevelt.  I am  going  to  tell  you  about  a 
New  York  man  who,  at  the  last  Hague  Conference,  brought 
forward  a fine  plan.  He  recommended  that  before  any  of  the 
Powers  drew  the  sword  after  they  had  quarreled,  they  should 
call  on  two  friendly  Powers  to  act  as  mediators,  and  these  two 
Powers  should  have  thirty  days  to  discuss  whether  or  not  Peace 
could  be  preserved  without  war.  If  that  had  been  acted  upon, 
that  recommendation  of  this  New  York  boy,  the  honor  of 
England  would  never  have  been  stained  with  the  disgrace  of 
the  war  in  South  Africa,  and  the  war  between  Russia  and  Japan 
would  certainly  have  been  postponed,  if  not  altogether  prevented. 


194 

Now,  it  is  possible,  if  that  recommendation  were  made  obligatory, 
we  might  rid  the  world  of  the  danger  of  sudden  war.  But  in 
order  to  do  it,  it  is  necessary  that  public  opinion  be  awakened. 
I want  you,  my  friends,  to  supply  the  stimulus,  and  you  can  do 
it;  I will  show  you  how.  You  know  I have  been  around  all 
Europe  in  the  last  three  months,  seeing  Kings  and  Queens,  and 
Prime  Ministers,  Foreign  Ministers  and  Ambassadors,  talking 
with  them  and  discussing  what  can  be  done.  They  all  told  me 
this:  ‘‘We  can  do  something  by  the  work  of  the  Conference, 
but  we  can’t  do  very  much  unless  the  people  are  aroused.”  I 
asked  them  how  the  people  could  be  aroused  and  they  said  they 
had  lost  heart.  When  I asked,  “Do  you  think  if  America  took 
the  lead,  there  would  be  a movement  throughout  the  Old 
World?”  they  replied:  “Oh,  yes,  if  America  took  the  lead,  then 
something  might  be  done.”  I want  to  know  whether  you  will 
take  the  lead  and  I ask  you  to  decide.  (Applause.) 

I will  tell  you  in  what  way  I think  it  is  a practicable  propo- 
sition, and  I have  discussed  this  with  all  the  most  eminent  men 
in  the  Old  World  and  I have  discussed  it  with  many  of  the  most 
eminent  men  in  the  New  World,  and  they  all  say  it  is  a 
magnificent  idea,  but — ah,  that  damnable  word  “but” — “but” — 
“but.”  (Laughter.)  I say,  let  us  get  into  action.  They  say 
we  cannot  get  the  right  kind  of  people;  the  people  whom  God 
has  blessed  most  in  this  world  are  too  comfortable  to  go,  they 
have  not  time  enough  to  go.  They  have  time  to  go  to  Europe 
for  months  and  months  to  amuse  themselves,  but  they  have  no 
time  to  go  and  plead  for  Peace,  and  to  carry  the  American  idea 
throughout  the  world.  I sometimes  feel  when  I talk  to  grown-up 
Americans  that  faith  has  died  out  of  their  souls,  and  in  place  of 
a heart  they  have  the  click  of  a dollar.  I sometimes  have  talked 
to  Americans  who  epitomized  all  that  is  worst  in  human  nature, 
who  were  cankered  by  too  great  prosperity,  eaten  up  by  the  idea 
that  they  existed  only  in  order  to  increase  their  pile;  but  I do 
find  the  true  Americans,  thank  God,  and  the  true  American  is 
before  me  now,  and  it  is  to  you  that  I make  my  appeal. 
(Applause.) 

Now,  you  may  ask  me  fairly  what  I propose  to  do.  I will 
tell  you.  The  plan  is  very  simple.  Let  us  get  twelve  of  the 
best  Americans  you  can  pick,  and  let  them  undertake  to  go  on 
a pilgrimage  to  Europe.  Now,  you  say,  “Why  do  you  want  them 


195 

to  go?”  First  of  all,  because  I think  the  best  Americans  owe 
most  to  America,  and  because  I think  that  you  want  to  get  your 
best  men  irrespective  of  party,  faith  and  creed,  men  who  will  be 
ready  to  stand  up  and  say:  “Look  here,  we  are  exposing 
ourselves  to  ridicule  or  the  risk  of  ridicule.  We  know  we  have 
to  take  a month  of  very  precious  time,  we  know  we  have  to 
show  our  ignorance  of  foreign  languages;  but  are  we  not  the 
sons  of  those  men  who  under  that  Star  Spangled  Banner  fought 
and  died?”  Are  you  worthy  sons  of  those  great  forefathers,  if 
you  would  not  take  a little  trouble  for  the  sake  of  the  Peace  of 
the  world?  (Applause.)  My  friends,  this  is  an  important  occa- 
sion, and  I want  to  say  to  you  quite  frankly  and  squarely  that 
on  the  question  of  your  response  to  this  appeal  and  on  the 
opportunity  I have  of  putting  this  before  you  now,  depends,  more 
than  you  can  realize,  the  results  to  be  accomplished  at  the  Hague 
Conference;  and  when  I say  that,  I am  speaking  not  only  my 
belief,  but  the  unanimous  opinion  of  all  the  best  informed  people 
in  Europe. 

Now,  we  want  these  twelve  men  and  twelve  women  to  be 
backed  up  by  everybody  that  is  anybody  in  the  United  States. 
We  want  them  to  go  to  President  Roosevelt  and  Secretary  Root 
and  say,  “We  represent  the  wishes  that  have  been  voiced  in  this 
great  Conference,  we  represent  the  aspirations  of  the  American 
people  for  Peace.”  I know  that  President  Roosevelt  and  Secre- 
tary Root  will  be  delighted  to  have  an  opportunity  to  aid  in  this 
great  work. 

Froni  Washington  the  pilgrims  will  come  to  New  York, 
where  I am  sure  you  will  give  them  a great  send-off  as  they 
start  on  their  mission  of  Peace. 

From  New  York  they  would  sail  for  Southampton  or  Liver- 
pool. I had  a letter  only  yesterday  from  the  secretary  of  the 
committee  over  there,  in  which  he  said  they  would  be  glad  to 
receive  your  representatives,  and  have  twelve  of  our  best  men 
and  our  best  women  ready  to  join  them,  and  go  on  the 
pilgrimage.  When  they  come  to  London  they  will  be  received 
with  all  honor ; they  will  go  to  your  Ambassador,  who  will  present 
them  to  our  Monarch,  whose  heart  is  sound  and  good  for  all 
that  is  beautiful  and  peaceful.  They  will  see  our  Ministers,  who 
will  hold  a great  demonstration  in  which  the  British  and 
American  pilgrims  will  be  joined  by  Scandinavians,  and  from 


ig6 

London  they  will  cross  over  to  Paris  and  there  make  a stand ; 
and  I tell  you  there  is  no  man  whose  heart  is  more  responsive  to 
an  appeal  made  in  the  name  of  humanity  and  fraternity  than  is 
that  of  the  President  of  the  great  French  nation.  They  will  be 
received  by  the  President  of  the  Republic,  by  the  Parisian  Munici- 
pality ; they  will  be  feted,  not  as  conquerors,  but  as  brothers  com- 
ing with  messages  of  good-will  and  hope,  and  with  twelve  French 
pilgrims  they  will  go  forth  to  Geneva,  and  there  be  joined  by 
twelve  pilgrims ; from  there  they  will  go  to  Vienna  and  Buda 
Pesth,  adding  twelve  to  their  number  in  each  place;  then  on  to 
St.  Petersburg  to  meet  the  Czar  and  salute  the  Duma,  the  first 
constitutional  representative  assemblage  Russia  has  had ; then 
turning  eastward,  they  will  come  to  Berlin,  and  from  Berlin  to 
Brussels,  and  from  Brussels  to  The  Hague;  and  there,  in  the 
name  of  the  united  international  world,  they  will  present  their 
petitions  before  The  Hague  delegates. 

I come  to  ask  you  for  your  help.  I remember  that  the  statue 
of  Lafayette  was  raised  by  the  school  children  of  America,  and  I 
want  the  whole  cost  of  that  pilgrimage  to  be  paid  for  by  the 
youth  of  America.  “A  child  shall  lead”  and  a child  may  pay 
the  bill,  and  you  can  do  it,  you,  my  friends,  not  merely  those  in 
this  hall,  but  the  millions  of  American  youth  in  whose  hearts 
faith  has  not  died  out,  if  you  only  bind  yourselves  together,  each 
under  your  teacher  and  your  own  school,  in  order  to  raise  the 
two  hundred  thousand  dollars  that  is  necessary  to  finance  the 
pilgrimage.  With  this  last  word  I will  sit  down. 

If  it  be  the  will  of  God,  it  can  be  done.  I remember  in  the 
Middle  Ages  long  ago,  Peter  the  Hermit  proclaimed  a great 
pilgrimage  and  summoned  all  the  children  to  rally  to  the  defense 
of  the  place  where  Christ  had  lain.  I summon  you  as  did  Peter 
the  Hermit,  and  I ask  you  to  join  me.  God  wills  it,  God  wills 
it,  and  God  helping,  we  will  do  it.  (Applause.) 

Dr.  Maxwell: 

Whenever  the  day  and  the  hour  come,  I can  promise  for  the 
children  of  New  York  that  they  will  take  the  lead.  (Applause.) 
Let  me  in  a single  word,  on  behalf  of  the  children  of  the  New 
York  schools,  and  on  behalf  of  the  teachers  of  the  New  York 
schools,  and  on  behalf  of  the  Board  of  Education  of  the  City 
of  New  York,  thank  the  ladies  and  gentlemen  who  have  spoken 


197 

here  this  afternoon ; who  have  spoken  words  that  have  sunk  deep 
into  our  hearts,  and  which  we  shall  carry  to  every  school,  and  to 
every  other  teacher  and  every  other  pupil  in  this  great  city  of 
ours. 

After  the  singing  of  “America,”  the  audience  will  be 
dismissed.  I am  going  to  trespass  upon  your  patience,  and  ask 
you  to  sit  in  your  seats  and  see  the  Public  School  children 
dismissed  as  they  would  be  dismissed  in  a Public  School.  (Dr. 
Maxwell  here  gave  instructions  as  to  which  section  should  pass 
out  first  and  which  section  should  pass  out  last,  and  which  aisles 
they  should  use  in  making  their  exits.) 

Now,  as  America  is  never  more  glorious  than  when  leading 
in  Peace,  I ask  this  audience  to  sing  our  old  song  “America”  as 
it  never  was  sung  before. 


SEVENTH  SESSION 


UNIVERSITY  MEETING 

Carnegie  Hall 

Tuesday  Evening,  April  1 6,  at  8.15 

DR.  NICHOLAS  MURRAY  BUTLER  Presiding 

The  Chairman: 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : This  evening  has  been  set  apart 
that  the  voice  of  the  colleges  and  universities  of  the  civilized 
world  may  be  heard. 

The  participation  of  the  institutions  of  higher  learning  in 
this  Congress  was  inevitable.  Of  all  modern  institutions  the 
universities  stand  first  and  foremost  as  responsible  representatives 
of  the  highest  ideals  of  the  people.  Their  task  is,  in  part  by 
instruction,  in  part  by  research  and  publication,  and  in  part  by 
example,  to  make  manifest  the  significance  of  civilization  and  to 
extend  and  uplift  it. 

Scholarship,  science,  knowledge  are  varying  names  for  the 
instrument  with  which  universities  work.  Scholarship,  science, 
knowledge  are  truly  international.  They  know  no  limitations  of 
speech  and  no  political  boundaries  can  contain  or  restrain  them. 
They  serve  to  unite  and  to  unify  mankind  as  no  other  agency  or 
power  has  ever  been  able  to  do.  Of  necessity,  because  of  their 
origin  in  the  depths  of  the  spirit  and  their  aim  in  highest  human 
aspiration,  they  offer  generous  and  enthusiastic  co-operation  in 
the  cause  which  this  Congress  is  called  to  promote.  To  exalt 
righteousness  and  reason,  to  bring  brute  force  and  passion  under 
the  rule  of  reflective  judgment  and  moral  feeling,  are  the  aims  of 
those  who  band  together  to  advance  the  cause  of  arbitration  in 
the  settlement  of  international  disputes  and  the  cause  of  peace 
between  nations,  that  the  standard  of  living  may  be  elevated,  the 
character  of  the  people  refined  and  exalted,  and  the  knowledge 
of  truth  made  more  widespread  and  controlling. 

Very  frequently  in  these  public  discussions  we  hear  poor 


199 

use  made  of  a noble  sentiment.  A favorite  and  striking  phrase 
of  those  who  participate  in  public  discussions  on  war  and  peace 
is,  “Infamous  the  nation  which  does  not  make  all  possible  sacrifice 
for  its  moral  integrity,”  and  that  sentiment  is  made  to  serve  as  an 
excuse,  a foundation,  for  wanton  militarism.  No  man  can  so 
interpret  that  phrase  to-day  without  misinterpreting  the  feeling  of 
any  civilized  people  for  whom  he  may  presume  to  speak.  It  is  a 
full  generation  since  the  nations  of  Western  Europe,  in  particular, 
have  stained  their  hands  with  war  against  each  other. 

At  no  time  in  history  has  economic  and  industrial  progress 
been  so  rapid  as  during  this  era  of  peace.  Never  before  has  the 
condition  of  labor  been  so  much  improved,  the  opportunities  for 
the  profitable  use  of  capital  so  largely  multiplied  or  the  influence 
of  education  extended  with  such  rapidity  and  power.  Believe  me, 
my  friends,  with  this  state  of  affairs  the  great  mass  of  the  people 
of  Europe,  like  the  great  mass  of  the  people  of  America,  are  abso- 
lutely satisfied.  They  are  rapidly  outgrowing,  if  they  have  not 
already  outgrown,  the  barbaric  childishness  of  the  era  of  the  duel, 
whether  between  individuals  or  between  nations. 

Surely,  the  moral  integrity  of  a nation  is  shown  not  by  sur- 
render to  militarism,  but  by  stern  resistance  to  it.  Defense 
against  assault  is  the  privilege  and  duty  of  a nation,  as  it  is  the 
privilege  and  duty  of  an  individual.  Defensive  armaments  are 
not  evidences  of  militarism.  Exaggerated  armaments  which,  by 
their  very  existence  are  an  invitation  to  offensive  use,  are  an  evi- 
dence of  militarism.  Infamous,  indeed,  is  the  nation  which  will 
not  sacrifice  everything  for  its  moral  integrity;  but  it  will  find 
its  moral  integrity  in  following  the  teachings  of  ethics  and  the 
exhortations  of  reason,  and  to  these  teachings  and  exhortations 
the  universities  give  constant  and  emphatic  voice. 

It  is  appropriate  that  the  first  formal  word  to  be  spoken 
to-night  should  be  said  by  a representative  of  that  university 
which  is  famed  wherever  English  is  spoken,  and  of  which  Mat- 
thew Arnold  once  said  that  whatever  faults  it  might  have,  it  has 
never  delivered  itself  over  to  the  Philistine. 

To  speak  to  this  great  audience  in  behalf  of  the  ancient  Uni- 
versity of  Oxford  I have  the  honor  to  present  the  Principal  of 
Jesus  College,  Pro-Vice  Chancellor  of  the  University  of  Oxford, 
and — J take  great  pleasure  in  adding — a warm  personal  friend 
(applause)  Dr.  John  Rhys. 


200 


The  Relation  of  the  University  to 
International  Good-will 

D;r.  John  Rhys 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : I introduce  myself  as  coming 
from  the  same  district  as  the  Great  Apostle  of  Peace,  the  late 
Henry  Richards,  whose  name  I have  heard  with  great  pleasure 
mentioned  more  than  once  in  these  meetings.  As  the  president 
has  told  you,  I come  as  the  representative  of  the  University  of 
Oxford. 

When  I was  asked  to  speak  at  this  great  Peace  Congress,  I 
felt  keenly  sorry  that  the  Vice-Chancellor  of  the  University  of 
Oxford  could  not  be  here  himself,  for  he  could  have  represented 
the  University  far  more  adequately  than  his  substitute  can  hope 
to  do.  Some  of  us  are  so  completely  of  the  Old  World  that  we 
should  find  your  social  atmosphere  too  bracing  for  us  to  thrive 
here,  but  our  Vice-Chancellor  is  such  that,  had  his  lines  fallen  in 
pleasant  places  in  the  United  States,  he  could  not  have  failed  to 
prosper  greatly.  He  is  a man  of  liberal  opinions  and  business 
habits  like  yourselves.  He  throws  his  whole  energy  into  the 
work  of  the  University,  and  judging  from  the  tenor  of  his  life  I 
should  say  that  his  motto  is  Peace  and  Progress.  With  the 
powerful  aid  of  the  statesman  whom  our  University  has  recently 
elected  to  be  her  Chancellor,  we  expect  to  see  him  inaugurate  a 
period  of  great  academical  prosperity.  But  for  all  such  prosperity 
and  progress,  peace,  continuous  peace,  is  a sine  qua  non. 

Mr.  Carnegie,  with  the  thoroughness  characteristic  of  all  his 
doings,  including  his  vast  hospitality,  has  gone  into  the  reckoning 
of  what  war  means — what  loss  war  means — to  the  material  indus- 
tries of  the  leading  nations  of  the  world.  In  this  context  I wish 
to  emphasize  the  intellectual  industry  represented  by  colleges  and 
universities,  a subtle  industry  which  pervades  the  other  industries 
and  makes  their  prosperity  possible  in  the  highest  sense  of  the 
word.  If  we  take  our  trained  intellects  away  to  guide  the  destruc- 
tive work  of  war,  what  becomes  of  the  best  and  highest  interests 
of  our  material  industries?  To  say  the  least,  they  cease  to  pros- 
per ; the  flow  of  new  ideas  fails  to  reach  them ; the  artistic  element 
permeating  them  grows  senile  and  ugly. 


EDMUND  J.  JAf. 


201 

I have  lived  to  see  and  hear  of  far  too  many  wars.  When 
the  Franco-Prussian  struggle  of  1870  startled  the  whole  of 
Europe,  I was  a member  of  the  Sanskrit  and  Zend  classes  of  Pro- 
fessor Brockhaus  at  Leipsic,  but  alas ! those  classes  were  broken 
up  suddenly  owing  to  all  the  native  Germans  in  attendance  having 
to  hurry  away  to  the  seat  of  war.  Some  of  them  never  returned ; 
some  came  back  in  the  discharge  of  duties  assigned  them,  and  I 
had  a conversation  with  one  or  two.  They  were  in  the  ranks 
shoulder  to  shoulder  with  peasants,  weather-beaten  and  clad  in 
clothes  worn  threadbare  like  the  rest.  They  were  contented  with 
their  lot,  it  is  true,  for,  as  they  observed  to  me,  they  knew  it  was 
impossible  for  all  educated  men  in  the  army  to  be  made  officers. 
Nevertheless  it  was  a pitiful  sight  which  impressed  me  very  pro- 
foundly, to  see  the  rising  philologists  of  Germany  treated  as  so 
much  food  for  powder.  The  most  venerable  traditions  we  pos- 
sess seem  to  sum  up  the  intellectual  acquirements  of  the  human 
race  at  the  outset  as  “knowledge  of  good  and  evil,”  but  war 
mostly  brings  with  it  knowledge  of  evil  alone,  experience  of  mis- 
ery and  suffering,  social  cataclysms  and  the  overthrow  of  orderly 
life. 

Looking  at  the  question  of  Peace  and  War  in  its  bearing  on 
University  life,  I would  call  your  attention  for  a moment  to  a 
movement  at  Oxford  which  makes  for  Peace  and  Good-will,  a 
movement  set  on  foot  by  the  thoughtfulness  and  generosity  of  one 
of  Oxford’s  most  remarkable  alumni  in  modern  times,  Cecil 
Rhodes.  His  benefaction  enables  each  of  the  States  in  your 
great  Union  to  send  over  to  Oxford  a number  of  selected  students 
to  go  through  a part  of  their  academical  career  on  the  banks  of 
the  Isis.  In  fact  you  have  already  sent  us  an  excellent  contin- 
gent; they  have  not  failed  to  show  us  what  they  can  do.  They 
are  all  immensely  popular  in  the  University,  but  they  are  too 
sensible  to  be  spoiled.  What,  however,  I wish  to  point  out  is, 
that  those  students  will  have  ample  opportunities  of  making  them- 
selves acquainted,  among  other  things,  with  British  peculiarities 
and  British  prejudices — the  most  stubborn  of  all  the  facts  with 
which  I am  acquainted.  If  the  present  scheme  were  to  be  doubled 
so  as  to  provide  for  our  sending  students  over  to  the  American 
Universities,  the  exchange  would  be  complete.  But  I foresee 
difficulties,  arising  out  of  our  fears  that  the  British  contingent 
would  never  come  home  again,  but  settle  down  here  to  make 


202 


money  in  the  United  States.  Lopsided  as  you  may  think  the  pres- 
ent scheme,  it  is  calculated  to  work  distinctly  for  Peace  and  Good- 
will. Usually  men  who  thoroughly  understand  one  another  are 
not  the  readiest  to  rush  at  one  another’s  throats  at  the  slightest 
provocation  or  no  provocation  at  all.  Your  young  men  who  come 
over  to  Oxford  are  likely,  when  they  return  home,  to  prove  men 
of  capacity  and  leaders  of  opinion.  One  of  your  greatest  authori- 
ties in  educational  matters  has  shown  that  far  the  greater  number 
of  your  great  judges  and  your  great  statesmen  have  been  college 
men.  We  on  the  other  side  of  the  ocean  boast  that  quite  a hand- 
some proportion  of  those  who  guide  the  destinies  of  the  British 
Empire  are  men  who  have  received  their  education  at  Oxford. 
To  bring  these  important  classes  of  students  in  contact  with  one 
another  while  they  are  preparing  themselves  for  positions  of 
responsibility  in  their  respective  countries  seems,  therefore,  an 
experiment  worth  making  on  a large  scale.  We  believe  not  only 
that  their  knowledge  of  one  another  would  prove  to  be  an  influ- 
ence making  for  peace,  as  I have  already  suggested,  but  we 
believe  further  that  peace  and  friendliness  made  permanent 
between  America  and  the  British  Empire  would  always  go  a long 
way  to  fortify  the  reign  of  peace  over  the  rest  of  the  world.  The 
deep-seated  desire  of  the  two  great  Anglo-Celtic  powers  to  be  on 
thoroughly  friendly  terms  with  one  another  and  to  act  together 
in  the  cause  of  liberty  and  culture  constitutes  a fact  not  easily 
overlooked  by  any  would-be  disturber  of  the  world’s  peace. 

The  University  of  Oxford  congratulates  herself,  accordingly, 
on  contributing  something  towards  the  great  end  which  the 
friends  of  peace  gathered  together  in  this  city  have  in  view. 
Above  all  she  profoundly  appreciates  the  steps  which  your  great 
Republic  has  already  taken  in  the  way  of  peace,  steps  taken  under 
the  guidance  of  your  vigorous  and  warm-hearted  President, 
backed  by  Carnegie  and  other  men  of  wealth  and  wisdom.  But 
in  the  Old  Country  it  is  not  the  University  of  Oxford,  alone,  that 
sympathizes  with  you,  but  all  the  thinking  men  and  women  of 
the  British  Isles.  My  personal  feelings  I could  not  better  express 
than  in  the  words  of  your  own  poet : 

“I  greet  with  a full  heart  the  land  of  the  West, 

Whose  banner  of  stars  o’er  a world  is  unrolled.” 

I will  say  no  more ; you  know  what  I mean. 


203 


Dr.  Butler: 

It  is  appropriate  that  after  hearing  the  voice  of  Oxford,  we 
should  hear  the  voice  of  her  sister  university,  the  university  of 
Sir  Isaac  Newton,  of  long  ago,  and  the  university  of  the  genial 
and  scholarly  Jebb  of  yesterday.  I have  the  honor  to  present  to 
you  the  Master  of  Gonville  and  Caius,  the  Vice-Chancellor  of  the 
University  of  Cambridge,  Dr.  Roberts. 

The  Christian  Ministry  and  the  Peace  Movement 

Reverend  E.  S.  Roberts 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen,  and  Fellow  Students  of  the 
Universities  and  Colleges:  You  have  heard  from  your  Chair- 
man that  it  is  appropriate  that  the  representatives  of  the  two 
ancient  universities  of  England  should  speak  on  such  an  occasion 
as  this.  It  is  also  appropriate  that  the  one  which  does  not  care  to 
contend  whether  it  is  the  younger  or  older  university,  should 
speak  second.  (Laughter.)  It  has  nothing  to  do  with  my  sub- 
ject, but  I must  tell  you  one  little  story  which  reflects  credit  upon 
my  own  college. 

My  college  is  named  “Gonville  and  Keys’’  and  usually  spelled 
KEYS,  although  it  is  really  CAIUS,  more  particularly  and 
briefly  entitled  Keys,  because  it  was  founded  by  a man  named 
Dr.  Keys.  At  that  time  there  was  a famous  Oxford  historian 
named  Key,  who  tried  to  prove  that  Oxford  was  the  ancient 
university  and  Cambridge  was  the  younger.  Dr.  Keys  in  the 
plural  tried  to  prove  exactly  the  opposite,  but  the  historian  of 
both  says  that  they  were  equally  mendacious,  but  Dr.  Keys  was 
the  more  reputable.  (Laughter  and  applause.) 

But  I must  come  to  the  subject;  the  time  allotted  to  my 
few  remarks  is  limited,  and  the  limitation  was  imposed  at  my  own 
request.  (Laughter.)  I feel  it  therefore  to  be  necessary  to 
divest  my  brief  address  of  all  superfluity,  and  proceed  without 
delay  to  the  one  very  simple  proposition  which  I desire  to  make. 
If  it  is  presented  in  a somewhat  crude  form,  I beg  you  to  accept 
the  explanation  that  because  of  the  time  limit  it  is  shorn  of  many 
arguments  and  illustrations  which  otherwise  might  have  com- 
mended it  to  you  more  forcibly.  I make  the  proposition  because 
I claim  for  it  these  merits : First,  it  contains  no  contentious,  per- 
nicious matter — most  important  in  a Peace  Congress;  second, 


204 

it  cannot  but  be  productive  of  good  results,  even  though  it  touches 
only  at  the  outer  fringe  of  the  most  difficult  problem  of  the 
world’s  politics ; third,  it  is  eminently  practicable ; and  fourth, 
and  most  important,  it  is  not  advertised  as  a panacea. 

To  me,  then,  some  four  years  ago,  the  question  of  the  duty 
of  the  ministry,  of  religion,  in  relation  to  the  abolition  of  war, 
presented  itself  in  this  form : ‘‘Can  the  ministers  of  religion,  in 
their  public  capacity,  and  by  united  and  organized  efforts,  make 
any  contribution  to  the  solution  of  the  great  problem  which  has 
baffled  politicians,  economists,  and  statesmen  since  time  began?” 

While  meditating  upon  this  question,  I read  in  the  Times  of 
London,  of  August,  1903,  a letter  signed  by  several  prominent 
English  clergymen;  that  letter  contained  an  appeal  to  the  Arch- 
bishop and  the  Bishops,  that  they  should  advise  their  clergy  to  set 
aside  one  Sunday  in  the  year,  to  be  devoted  to  the  subject  of  abol- 
ishing war.  The  letter  recommended  a simultaneous  delivery  in 
all  the  churches  of  sermons  in  which  the  leading  thought  should 
be  the  obligation  of  Christian  nations  to  seek  a substitute  for  that 
crime  of  war,  in  which  they  have  for  nineteen  centuries  despair- 
ingly acquiesced.  The  mere  Epicurean  observer  of  human  nature, 
whose  gods  care  not  for  men,  and  only  haunt  the  lucid  interspace 
of  world  and  world,  may  smile  at  what  he  may  deem  the  sim- 
plicity and  innocence  of  the  plan  shadowed  forth  by  those 
undoubtedly  honest  clergymen.  But  I recognize  in  the  letter 
quoted  the  assertion  of  a great  and  valuable  principle,  which — I 
speak  subject  to  correction — has  been  conspicuously  absent  from 
any  scheme,  if  there  has  been  a scheme,  for  a general  attack  by 
ministers  of  the  Christian  religion  upon  that  mental  attitude  of 
civilized  nations  which  regards  war  as  necessary,  or  in  some 
cases,  as  a justifiable  consequence  of  conflicting  interests.  The 
principle  they  affirmed  is  this : the  attacks  upon  the  spirit  of  mili- 
tarism must  be  continuous,  must  be  aggressive,  must  be  a part 
of  the  persistent  plan  to  be  carried  out  and  developed  in  time  of 
the  profoundest  Peace,  and  not  alone  when  we  are  overtaken  and 
bewildered  by  the  storm  and  stress  of  war.  I should  have  liked, 
if  I had  had  time,  to  go  into  that  question,  to  consider  the  history 
of  the  discourses  from  the  pulpit  in  times  of  peace.  I believe  that 
the  result  would  be  found  to  be  very  trifling  indeed.  Therefore, 
when  we  consider  what  answer  awaits  the  question,  “Are  the 
ministers  of  religion  doing  anything  at  all  toward  the  abolition  of 


THE  LIBRARY 
Of  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


From  Stereograph,  Copyright  1907,  by  Underwood  & Underwood,  New  York, 

Bishop  Henry  C.  Potter 
Pres.  Nicholas  Murray  Butler 


Pres.  Charles  W.  Eliot 


Rev.  Dr.  Lyman  Abbott 
Archbishop  John  M.  Farley 


205 

war?”  we  may  find  the  beginning  of  an  answer  in  this  assertion 
of  the  principle,  that  the  demon  of  war  must  be  exorcised  in  time 
of  peace. 

Returning  again  to  that  letter  in  the  Times , I would  remark 
firstly,  that  it  was  good  but  it  did  not  go  far  enough.  I would 
urge,  secondly,  that  a scheme  should  be  thought  out  by  which 
not  only  ministers  of  all  denominations  in  the  kingdom  of  Great 
Britain  and  in  all  the  British  Dominions  be  united  for  common 
action,  but  also,  that  the  common  action  should  extend  to  all  the 
people  who  speak  the  English  language;  and  gigantic  efforts  be 
made  to  induce  the  churches  in  all  European  countries  to  set  apart 
one  and  the  same  Sunday,  annually,  or  oftener,  for  the  advance- 
ment of  the  cause  in  hand.  My  belief  is  that  a well-advised  treat- 
ment of  the  subject,  based,  perhaps,  upon  carefully  made  sugges- 
tions from  wise  sources,  should  be  delivered  as  a simultaneous 
appeal  to  millions  of  church-going  people,  who,  after  all,  are  not 
the  least  thoughtful  people  necessarily — upon  a certain  Sunday. 
The  fact  that  the  sole  prominent  topic  of  that  day  all  over  the 
civilized  world  was  the  prevention  of  the  barbarous  arbitrament 
of  war,  could  not  fail  to  touch  men’s  minds  in  the  mass,  as  per- 
haps no  other  message  could.  And  the  knowledge  that  in  all  the 
churches  in  all  the  civilized  lands,  at  the  same  time,  the  same 
appeal  was  being  made  to  the  better  instincts  of  the  human  race, 
this  knowledge  could  not  but  increase,  enormously  increase,  the 
interest  sure  to  arise. 

Let  us  suppose  that  previous  to  1870,  the  year  that  has  been 
alluded  to  more  than  once  to-night,  let  us  suppose  that  previous 
to  1870  there  had  been  a ten  years’  campaign  throughout 
Christendom;  could  it  have  failed  to  leave  in  some  appreciable 
measure  a sense  of  solemn  responsibility  on  the  minds  of  states- 
men on  whose  individual  action  the  fate  of  Empires  may  depend  ? 
A statesman,  high  in  power,  can  practically  impose  or  repeal 
taxes,  can  impede  or  promote  education,  can  perpetuate  or  abolish 
slavery,  can  establish  or  disestablish  churches,  can  shake  or  fortify 
ancient  thrones,  and  lastly,* — it  was  true  a hundred  years  ago,  and 
it  is  not  held  untrue  now — he  can  ordain  peace  or  war.  But, 
with  all  the  churches  of  Christendom  united  in  one  object  and  not 
under  a thousand  points  of  difference,  not  only  united,  but  admin- 
istratively united,  we  might  even  hope  that  in  some  not  distant 
future  war  would  be  impossible.  Or,  as  Mr.  Root  said  yesterday, 


2o6 


it  would  be  unthinkable  to  find  a parallel  to  the  statement  made 
in  the  Times  of  August,  1903,  by  a sober  critic  who  wrote  thus: 
“As  time  goes  on  and  as  authentic  records  will  be  brought  to 
light,  it  becomes  more  clear  that  not  only  the  great  German  Chan- 
cellor, but  almost  all  the  leading  statesmen  in  Berlin,  had  been 
for  some  years  working  to  bring  about  war  between  Germany 
and  France.” 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen,  and  Fellow  Students,  I would  not  end 
with  a jarring  note.  If  this  indictment  were  true,  it  was 
assuredly  true  of  a very  few  people  only,  and  let  me  express  my 
personal  conviction,  even  if  that  indictment  was  true,  as  against 
a few  people  at  that  time,  it  was  not  and  could  not  be  true  of 
all  people — and  of  the  German  people,  for  which  I have  the 
highest  respect  and  admiration. 

Dr.  Butler: 

The  next  speaker  I have  the  honor  to  present  to  you  is  Presi- 
dent John  H.  Finley,  of  the  College  of  the  City  of  New  York. 

Soldiers  of  Peace 

President  John  H.  Finley 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : If  I did  not 
know  the  views  of  President  Eliot  on  foot-ball,  I should  liken 
myself  to  a substitute  who  has  suddenly  and  unexpectedly  been 
called  from  the  spectators’  benches,  or  the  side-line,  to  play  the 
place  of  center-guard  or  half-back,  in  this  all-world  university 
foot-ball  team  under  the  captainship  of  President  Butler  of 
Columbia  University.  (Applause.)  But,  fearing  that  this  figure 
may  be  somewhat  offensive  to  both  of  them,  I do  not  use  it. 
( Laughter. ) 

I am  not  going  to  speak  of  arbitration  or  disarmament, 
for  all  that  I could  say  and  would  say  would  be  repetition  or 
reiteration,  but  I wish  to  ‘assure  you  of  my  admiration  for 
those  who  have  the  courage  to  iterate.  You  know  what  Mr. 
Chesterton  says  of  humanity,  “The  people  of  the  world  are 
divided  into  two  classes : the  bores  and  the  bored,  and  the  bores 
are  the  most  joyous  and  the  stronger  class.  They  are  demi- 
gods! Nay,  they  are  all  gods,  for  it  is  only  a god  who  dares 
iterate.  To  him  every  night-fall  is  new  and  the  last  rose  as  red 


207 

as  the  first.”  Nor  am  I going  to  speak  on  the  economical  advan- 
tage of  Peace  in  relation  to  the  future  of  the  world.  I shall  take 
my  less  than  ten  minutes  to  ask  a question : “Is  war  needed  in 
the  curriculum  of  nations  as  a discipline  of  manly  virtues?”  It 
seems  an  academic  question.  It  is  one  that  has  been  largely 
discussed  of  late  in  another  association.  It  is  the  one  in  which 
the  universities  and  schools  are  especially  interested,  because  they 
have  the  keeping  of  the  ideal  of  one  generation  for  the  next, 
and  the  making  of  its  discipline.  I read  in  a newspaper  of 
Sir  Robert  Ball’s  lauding  of  his  bare-footed,  war-like  ancestors, 
fighting  through  the  ages  and  bequeathing  their  intellectual  and 
physical  spoils  to  him.  They  sent  him  out  traveling  among  the 
stars.  I hear  Justice  Oliver  Wendell  Holmes  saying,  “War  when 
you  are  at  it” — he  uses  a longer  word  than  a certain  general — 
“war  when  you  are  at  it  is  horrible  and  dull ; it  is  only  when  time 
has  passed  that  you  see  that  its  message  is  divine.”  Then  he 
adds,  “Some  teaching  of  this  kind  we  all  need.”  I hear  John 
Ruskin  asserting  of  war  that  it  is  the  foundation  of  all  our 
virtues  and  faculties,  and  that  men,  that  nations  must  have 
their  truth  of  word  and  strength  of  thought  in  war.  But  why 
do  these  men — this  surveyor  of  the  stars,  this  justice  of  the 
highest  court  of  national  arbitration,  and  this  peace-practising 
man  of  letters  and  art — praise  war  ? Sir  Robert  Ball  has 
given  his  answer,  and  I will  let  the  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court 
give  his.  “There  is  one  thing  I do  not  doubt,  and  that  is  that 
the  faith  is  true  and  adorable  which  leads  the  soldier  to  throw 
away  his  life  in  obedience  to  plainly  accepted  duty  in  a cause 
which  he  little  understands,  a plan  of  campaign  of  which  he  has 
no  notion,  under  tactics  of  which  he  does  not  see  the  use.”  It  is 
because  we  find  his  faith  true  and  adorable  that  we  praise  the 
soldier,  that  he  has  been  transfigured  from  a man  who  is  paid, 
as  the  word  soldier  originally  meant,  into  a man  of  valor,  a man 
with  a splendid  fearlessness  for  life. 

But  is  there  no  other  school  for  that  faith,  no  other  cause  for 
its  culture  than  that  which  makes  battle  its  laboratory  and  the 
slaughter  of  men  the  test  of  efficiency?  And  are  nations  to  learn 
the  true  value  of  words  only  when  they  are  written  in  human  blood, 
and  cultivate  their  strength  of  thought  only  by  devising  strategy  ? 
I have  in  mind  an  incident  which  General  Gordon  relates  in  his 
reminiscences  of  the  Civil  War — a reminiscence  of  the  battle  of 


208 


Antietam.  He  tells  of  a rabbit  making  its  way  through  a gap 
in  the  lines,  showing  a white  flag  of  truce  as  he  ran.  An  Irish- 
man seeing  it  said,  “Go  it!  I wish  I was  going  where  you 
are  going.”  “Yes,”  said  a comrade  by  his  side,  “I  would  be 
going  too,  if  t’were  not  for  my  character.”  It  was  that  char- 
acter exhibited  in  war,  but  developed  in  Peace,  which  made 
the  ratio  of  courage  so  high  in  many  of  the  battles  of  the  Civil 
War.  It  was  not  the  greater  range  of  the  gun,  the  better 
marksmanship,  nor  any  such  physical  reason,  but  it  was  the  char- 
acter of  the  men  on  both  sides,  the  North  and  the  South,  that 
made  these  bloody  contests  what  they  were.  This  suggests  the 
part  that  universities  and  schools  must  take  in  this  great  move- 
ment for  World  Peace — to  keep  the  hard  discipline  that  is 
found  in  the  camp,  and  on  the  march;  to  teach  the  men  to  do 
their  duty,  even  when  they  do  not  understand  the  plan  of  the 
campaign  or  see  the  use  of  the  tactics ; to  fix  in  them  a char- 
acter which  cares  not  for  comfort  but  for  conquest;  but  above 
all  things  else  to  produce  in  them  a spirit  which  will  make  them 
indifferent  to  their  own  loss  or  fortune,  or  even  to  life  itself,  in 
the  devotion  to  interests  which  are  larger  than  their  own ; which 
will  plant  in  their  hearts  “the  soldier’s  faith  against  the  doubt  of 
civil  life,  more  besetting  and  harder  to  overcome  than  all  the 
misgivings  of  the  battle-field ; which  will  cause  them  to  love 
glory  more  than  to  wallow  in  ease.” 

There  is  our  chance,  our  best  chance  to  help  the  cause  of 
internal  and  international  Peace — not  by  contributing  to  appro- 
priations for  carrying  on  war,  but  by  intelligence,  by  a greater 
industrial  skill  and  individual  initiative ; by  greater  willingness 
to  endure  hardship  as  a good  soldier,  not  merely  physical 
hardship,  sleeping  on  the  bare  ground,  or  going  without  food, 
and  shelter,  but  by  holding  ourselves  to  some  rigid  course  of 
study,  some  discipline,  some  high  profession,  by  thinking  through 
the  problems  of  life  until  we  come  out  upon  the  boundaries  of 
the  known  truth.  Our  task  should  be  in  teaching  men,  not  alone 
how  to  save  life,  nor  to  prolong  life,  nor  to  make  it  more 
comfortable,  but  how  to  lose  life  nobly.  It  is  the  miser  of  life 
as  well  as  of  wealth  whom  we  hold  in  contempt.  Some  time 
ago  I wrote  what  I called  the  “Soldier’s  Recessional,”  descriptive 


209 

of  the  passing  of  the  great  choristers  of  our  Civil  War  through 
the  narrow  arch  which  hides  the  everlasting  from  this  life — 

Soon,  soon  will  pass  the  last  gray  pilgrim  through, 

Of  that  thin  line  in  surplices  of  blue ; 

Winding  as  some  tired  stream  asea 

Soon,  soon  will  sound  upon  our  listening  ears, 

His  last  song’s  quaver  as  he  disappears 
Beyond  our  answering  litany ; 

And  soon  the  faint  antiphonal  refrain 
Which  memory  repeats  in  sweetened  strain, 

Will  come  as  from  some  far  cloud  shore ; 

Then  for  a space  the  hush  of  unspoke  prayer, 

And  we  who’ve  knelt  shall  rise  with  heart  to  dare 
The  thing  in  Peace  they  sang  in  war. 

(Great  applause.) 

“The  song  they  sang  in  war,”  was  not  merely  a love  of 
Union,  it  was  not  a hate  of  slavery,  it  was  not  a devotion  to  any 
political  theory,  but  it  was  a readiness  to  give  their  lives  for 
something  greater  than  themselves,  something  beyond  their  selfish 
interests,  something  beyond  those  dearest  to  them,  something 
even  which  they  could  not  understand.  God  grant  that  we  have 
not  to  study  again  our  lesson  in  such  a school,  but  that  Peace,  if 
it  come  by  arbitration,  comes  not  at  the  price  of  those  virtues 
which  are  the  most  precious  possessions  of  the  people  who 
should  make  the  league  of  Peace — honesty,  reverence,  fearless- 
ness. We  must  keep  the  soldier’s  valor,  and  the  soldier’s  readi- 
ness to  give  his  life;  we  must  make  every  student  a soldier  in 
these  characteristics,  but  we  must  teach  him  to  give  his  life,  not 
by  telling  him  how  to  take  life,  but  by  showing  him  how  to 
ennoble  and  enrich  life.  (Great  applause.) 

Dr.  Butler: 

As  the  next  speaker,  I present  a fellow  citizen  whom  we  are 
always  glad  to  hear  for  himself  alone.  His  years  of  leadership  in 
this  community  have  made  his  voice  always  welcome  when  moral 
principles  are  at  stake.  In  addition,  he  comes  to  us  to-night  with 
his  hands  filled  with  credentials.  He  is  not  only  the  leader  of 
the  New  York  Society  for  Ethical  Culture,  not  only  the  Professor 
of  Social  and  Political  Ethics  in  Columbia  University,  but — as 
I have  the  honor  of  announcing  for  the  first  time — by  the  action 


14 


210 


of  the  Prussian  Ministry  of  Education,  the  Theodore  Roosevelt, 
Professor-elect,  in  the  University  of  Berlin  for  the  year  1908-09. 
I present  Dr.  Felix  Adler. 

What  Can  We  Do? 

Dr.  Felix  Adler 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : The  point  to 
which  I desire  to  address  myself  to-night  is  “What  can  we  do?” 
Not  what  can  governments  do,  but  what  can  you  and  I do  to 
advance  the  interests  of  Peace,  and  especially  what  is  the  duty  of 
the  universities  and  of  the  educated  class  whom  the  universities 
trained?  There  are  those  who  see  the  approach  of  Peace  in  the 
near  future.  There  are  others,  more  pessimistic  in  temperament, 
who  regard  the  day  of  Peace  as  far  off.  But  that  question  need 
not  concern  us  to-night.  There  is  a duty  laid  upon  every  one 
of  us,  in  the  words  of  the  Scripture,  to  “Seek  Peace  and  pursue 
it.”  It  is  for  us  to  pursue  it  steadfastly,  no  matter  when  the  goal 
will  be  attained. 

And  more  particularly  I would  speak  of  what  those  should 
do  who  have  had  the  advantage  of  a university  education.  I 
believe  that  university  men  have  a special  function.  They  are 
citizens,  like  the  rest,  but  they  have  a special  function  in  the 
matter  of  citizenship  and  in  regard  to  the  Peace  of  the  world. 

The  presence  on  this  platform  of  the  distinguished  men  who 
represent  the  ancient  universities  of  Oxford  and  Cambridge,  has 
led  my  thoughts  back  for  a moment  to  the  origin  of  the  great 
universities,  and  I stop  to  ask  myself : What  was  it  that  called 
them  into  being?  What  was  the  purpose  which  they  served  at 
their  origin?  Reflection  and  reading  have  led  me  to  believe  that 
all  institutions  are,  as  it  were,  stamped  at  their  origin,  and  that 
the  purpose  imprinted  upon  them  in  the  moment  of  their  birth 
is  never  wholly  lost,  and  that  they  can  never  wholly  depart  from 
it.  Now,  to  serve  what  purpose  did  these  great  universities 
spring  into  being?  They  came  into  being  in  response  to  a social 
need.  They  were  not  founded,  they  grew;  and  they  grew  in 
response  to  a great  social  need,  a need  that  has  since  been  often 
forgotten,  but  that  can  never  be  permanently  obscured.  They 
came  in  response  to  the  need  of  finding  intellectual  supports  for 
the  highest  and  deepest  faiths  of  mankind.  Unfortunately,  at 


21 1 


that  time  the  faith  was  conceived  of  too  rigidly.  It  stood  like  a 
rigid  wall,  which  the  play  of  intellect  could  not  affect.  And  so 
it  came  to  pass  that  the  intellect,  wearying  of  its  effort,  recoiled 
upon  itself.  Ahd  the  universities  restricted  themselves  more  or 
less  to  the  promotion  of  utilities  and  the  training  of  the  intel- 
lectual faculties.  But  the  university  of  the  future  will  resume 
the  purpose  for  which  it  came  into  life,  and  of  all  the  faiths  for 
which  it  will  seek  to  supply  intellectual  supports,  none  is  more 
important  than  the  faith  that  good  in  the  end  will  triumph  over 
evil,  sanity  over  madness,  civilization  over  barbarism,  and  that 
Peace  will  replace  War. 

Let  me  briefly  mention  two  ways  in  which  you,  my  fellow 
students,  you  the  men  and  women  of  our  colleges  and  universi- 
ties, can  be  the  sustainers  and  promoters  of  Peace.  In  the  first 
place  the  university  students  and  graduates  ought  above  all  others 
to  stand  for  sober  second  thought  in  times  of  popular  excitement. 
When  the  storm  is  abroad,  when  the  multitude  rages  like  a 
weltering  sea,  when  every  safeguard  threatens  to  be  swept  away, 
then  it  is  the  special  duty  of  those  who  have  learned  deliberation, 
who  have  been  trained  in  the  higher  institutions  of  learning,  to 
stand  for  deliberation.  In  monarchical  countries  there  are  bar- 
riers outside  the  people.  The  will  of  the  monarch  is  such  a 
barrier  against  popular  passion.  In  a democracy  there  can 
be  no  barriers  outside  the  people,  the  barriers  must  all  be  within 
the  people.  The  graduates  of  universities  should  form  a barrier 
against  popular  passion. 

There  are  two  phrases  one  often  hears,  “Public  sentiment,” 
“Public  opinion.”  For  my  part  I am  satisfied  with  neither  of 
them.  Sentiment  is  fluctuating;  opinion,  as  Plato  long  ago  told 
us,  is  capricious.  There  is  something  better  than  public  senti- 
ment and  public  opinion,  namely,  public  reason.  It  is  public  rea- 
son for  which  the  educated  classes  ought,  above  all  others,  to 
stand.  By  checking  popular  frenzies  they  can  help  the  cause  of 
Peace. 

Secondly,  they  can  be  of  immense  service  by  counteracting 
one  of  the  principal  causes  of  war,  namely,  the  antipathy  which 
is  so  generally  felt  against  whatever  is  alien  and  strange.  In 
early  times  the  stranger  was  ipso  facto  the  enemy,  and  even  at 
the  present  day  war  is  often  due  to  the  sheer  misunderstanding 
and  mistrust  of  aliens. 


212 


And,  on  the  contrary,  nothing  is  nobler  in  culture  than  the 
complete  transformation  which  it  works  in  this  sentiment.  The 
cultivated  man  is  one  who  realizes  that  the  type  of  civilization 
represented  by  foreign  countries  is  a necessary  complement  to  the 
type  of  civilization  represented  by  his  own  country.  He  is  one 
who  strives  to  appropriate  and  assimilate  whatever  is  excellent 
in  the  life,  the  thought,  the  ideals  of  strangers.  Culture  makes 
for  Peace ; and  universities,  so  far  as  they  stand  for  culture,  make 
for  Peace.  The  cultivated  man  is  one  who  is  able  truly  to  say, 
Homo  sum;  humani  nihil  a me  alienum  puto. 

And  now,  in  closing,  permit  me  one  additional  word.  I have 
often  speculated — who  has  not? — on  the  subject  of  what  is  called 
earthly  immortality.  There  have  been  various  pleasing  ways  in 
which  men  have  been  immortalized,  so  to  speak,  in  this  earthly 
fashion.  Some  men’s  names  linger  on  in  flowers,  as  for  instance 
that  of  Linnaeus,  the  celebrated  botanist,  in  the  delicate  and 
fragrant  linnaea.  The  names  of  others  have  been  attached  to 
trees,  like  the  famous  Cherokee  chief,  whose  name  lasts  on  in  the 
stately  Sequoia.  Others  are  perpetuated  by  attaching  their  names 
to  great  thoroughfares,  like  the  “Goethe  Strasse”  the  “Rue 
Voltaire.”  Others  perpetuated  their  names  by  inscribing  them 
over  the  portals  of  the  philanthropic  institutions  which  they  have 
founded.  But,  if  I may  be  permitted  to  say  so,  there  is  a finer, 
a more  spiritual  way  than  this,  and  that  is  to  be  willing  that  the 
name  shall  be  obliterated,  not  to  desire  that  it  shall  continue  to  be 
mentioned;  to  sink  the  private  self  in  some  objective  good,  like  the 
anonymous  builders  of  the  great  cathedrals,  whose  names  indeed 
are  forgotten,  but  who  continue  to  live  in  the  beauty  and  perfec- 
tion of  the  edifices  which  they  reared.  (Applause.)  At  The  Hague 
there  will  be  a Temple  of  Peace,  and  that  is  well.  But  it  can  but 
be  the  symbol  and  token  of  another  Temple  of  Peace  “not  builded 
by  hands,”  to  which  each  one  of  us  can  contribute  his  building 
stone;  a temple  whose  world-wide  dome  and  shining  arches  will 
one  day  gather  beneath  them  a sanctified  and  ennobled  humanity. 
That  temple  is  as  yet  a mere  vision ; but  surely  the  day  will  dawn, 
however  dark  the  clouds  that  obscure  its  dawning,  when  the 
vision  will  come  true.  And  blessed  are  we  if  we  are  contributors 
in  the  least  to  bring  it  nearer.  In  that  day  no  one  will  hurt 
another  any  more,  and  no  one  will  wound  another  any  more; 


213 

for  they  shall  all  speak  one  language,  the  language  of  simple 
friendliness  and  truth.  (Applause.) 

Dr.  Butler: 

A recent  book  entitled  “The  Newer  Ideals  of  Peace,”  which 
touches  with  skill,  learning,  and  high  feeling  upon  the  problems 
of  our  time,  had  for  its  author  the  next  speaker.  Already  she 
has  been  taxed  by  the  demand  of  the  overflow  meeting,  made  up 
of  hundreds  of  persons  unable  to  gain  admission  to  this  hall.  I 
take  great  pleasure  in  presenting  as  the  next  speaker  a woman 
who  is  a whole  college  in  herself — Miss  Jane  Addams,  of  Hull 
House,  Chicago. 

The  New  Internationalism 

Miss  Jane  Addams 

This  great  Peace  Conference  convened  here  was  called,  not 
merely  that  we  might  talk  together  and  prognosticate  concerning 
the  fine  things  which  will  take  place  at  the  next  Hague  Confer- 
ence, but  largely  that  we  might  take  stock  of  our  assets,  and 
formulate  the  new  hopes  upon  which  we  venture  to  predict  the 
final  coming  of  Peace. 

I take  it  that  I was  asked  to  speak  this  evening  upon  “The 
New  Internationalism,”  not  that  I might  state  the  internationalism 
of  the  scholar  which  has  been  so  ably  set  before  you,  for  in  all 
times  the  scholar  has  lived  in  “the  kingdom  of  the  mind,”  and 
has  known  no  national  bounds ; nor  yet  that  I might  speak  of  such 
international  congresses  as  those  which  meet  to  consider  ques- 
tions of  universal  postal  service  and  sanitary  science,  which  also 
belongs  to  that  higher  kingdom;  but  rather  that  I might  bring 
news  of  those  humbler  people,  who  have  hitherto  failed  to  enter 
this  “kingdom  of  the  mind”  because  of  that  traditional  attitude 
towards  aliens  which  Dr.  Adler  has  mentioned.  The  serf  tied  to 
the  soil  believed  that  the  people  on  the  other  side  of  the  moun- 
tain had  horns  and  claws;  the  peasant  who  never  ventured  from 
his  home  was  assured  that  he  would  be  killed  in  his  neighbor’s 
fields,  although  they  were  as  fertile  and  sunny  as  his  own.  Only 
now,  during  the  last  one  hundred  years,  are  we  able  to  say  that 
the  peasant  peoples  of  the  earth,  the  hewers  of  wood  and  the 
drawers  of  water,  have  at  last  come  into  a larger  cosmopolitanism 


214 

founded  upon  community  of  interests  and  knowledge.  For  the  first 
time  in  the  history  of  the  world  these  humbler  people  have  been 
able  to  undertake  peaceful  travel — to  cross  mountains  and  seas. 
An  Italian  neighbor  of  mine  can  come  from  Naples  to  Chicago 
for  twenty-two  dollars,  and  he  can  go  back  from  Chicago  to 
Naples  for  eighteen  dollars,  and  he  often  does  go  back  to  save  his 
winter’s  coal  bill.  It  is  now  for  the  first  time  that  millions  of 
people  throughout  the  earth  have  been  able  to  read  together.  We 
do  not  realize  how  short  a term  of  years  it  is  since  this  same 
trick  of  reading  has  been  spread  over  the  face  of  the  nations. 
We  all  read  practically  the  same  news  every  morning.  We  may 
accuse  our  newspapers  of  lack  of  accuracy  in  the  reports  they 
make,  we  may  accuse  them  of  lack  of  perception  in  that  they  do 
not  print  the  significant  things  as  they  occur  over  the  face  of  the 
earth,  but  certainly  we  cannot  accuse  them  of  lack  of  enterprise  in 
pushing  their  circulations.  (Laughter.)  As  a result  of  this 
untiring  enterprise,  thousands  of  people  are  brought  together  each 
day  into  a new  common  kingdom  of  the  mind ; it  may  be  narrow, 
it  may  concern  only  the  trivial  things  of  life,  the  sensations  of 
murder  and  sudden  death,  but  at  least  for  a few  minutes  after 
breakfast  each  morning  millions  of  men  come  together  and  con- 
sider those  events  which  are  of  international  report.  What  is 
happening  from  this  new  bringing  together  of  the  peoples  of  the 
earth?  Some  of  us  who  live  in  cosmopolitan  neighborhoods  are 
convinced,  although  I am  sure  that  you  would  soon  learn  it  for 
yourselves  if  you  were  subjected  to  the  same  environment — that 
at  this  moment  there  is  arising  in  these  cosmopolitan  centers  a 
sturdy,  a virile  and  an  unprecedented  internationalism  which  is 
fast  becoming  too  real,  too  profound,  tOQ  widespread,  ever  to  lend 
itself  to  warfare.  The  rulers  who  have  hitherto  urged  warfare 
because  of  their  dynastic  ambitions  or  their  religious  differences 
or  their  imperialistic  vanities,  or  anything  else  you  please,  have 
always  been  obliged  to  dress  these  motives  in  fine  phrases  before 
they  could  inscribe  them  on  the  banners  of  the  multitude ; and 
these  same  rulers,  before  they  could  induce  even  their  own  people 
to  follow  them,  have  been  forced  to  portray  the  enemy  as  hideous 
or  wicked  or  barbaric  or  “weak.”  At  the  present  moment,  how- 
ever, if  the  people  who  have  entered  into  this  new  international- 
ism are  to  be  led  into  warfare,  they  must  be  led  against  their 
next-door  neighbors;  and  if  they  cannot  tear  themselves  apart 


215 

from  each  other  long  enough  to  get  the  alien  point  of  view,  then 
it  is  impossible  for  them  to  obtain  the  point  of  view  necessary  for 
the  soldier,  and  ambitious  rulers  will  appeal  and  command  in 
vain. 

Ruskin  has  been  quoted  here  just  now  to  tell  us  that  war 
alone  preserves  the  sense  of  detachment,  the  willingness  to  sacri- 
fice life  for  higher  aims  which  the  soldier’s  career  has  engendered; 
and  yet  it  is  Ruskin  who  reminds  us  that  we  admire  the  soldier, 
not  because  he  goes  forth  to  slay,  but  because  he  goes  forth  ready 
to  be  slain.  When  we  get  down  to  the  real  essence  of  war,  when- 
ever we  try  to  find  out  what  it  is  which  we  actually  admire — that 
which  has  made  men  extol  war  through  many  generations — we 
suddenly  discover  that  it  is  this  high  carelessness  concerning  life, 
that  it  is  the  spirit  of  the  martyr  who  sets  his  faith  above  his  life. 
So  I believe  that  when  we  once  apprehend  the  international  good- 
will which  is  gathering  in  the  depths  of  the  cosmopolitan  peoples, 
that  we  will  there  discover  a reservoir  of  that  moral  devotion 
which  has  fostered  “the  cause  of  the  people,”  so  similar  in  every 
nation,  throughout  all  the  crises  in  the  world’s  history.  All  that 
we  need  to  do  for  the  healing  of  the  nations  is  to  provide  chan- 
nels through  which  its  beneficent  waters  may  flow.  If  this  devo- 
tion to  unselfish  aims  were  given  its  ritual,  or,  if  you  please,  its 
paraphernalia,  the  beat  of  its  own  drums ; if  it  were  made  such  a 
spectacle  as  men  like  to  see  and  have  a right  to  see,  then  I believe 
that  we  would  be  in  no  danger  of  losing  the  value  of  the  war  vir- 
tues, and  that  we  would  find  their  substitutes  in  a new  cosmopoli- 
tanism which  is  developing  in  the  life  of  the  common  people.  It 
is  too  precious  a moral  asset  to  be  longer  overlooked. 

It  is  in  some  such  hope  as  this,  in  the  desire  to  make  it  valid 
and  tangible,  to  receive  new  assurance  of  its  power,  that  some  of 
us  have  come  to  this  Peace  Congress.  It  is  needless  to  say  that 
it  is  hard  to  formulate  it ; that  although  this  power  of  devotion  to 
the  human  cause  is  no  mean  force,  it  is  difficult  to  put  it  over 
against  the  pomp  of  war.  Yet  it  is  growing  and  developing  in 
this  America  of  ours  as  it  is  nowhere  else,  because  nowhere  else 
does  it  have  the  same  opportunity.  Unless  we  recognize  it, 
unless  we  lead  it  forth  and  give  it  the  courageous  expression 
which  it  deserves,  we  will  be  thrown  back  into  the  old  ideals  of 
warfare,  which  we  ought  to  give  up,  not  because  they  are  old,  but 
because  they  do  not  fit  the  present  moment.  It  is  needless  to  say 


2l6 


that  it  is  always  dangerous  to  be  forced  to  abandon  old  ideals  and 
emotions  without  any  new  ones  which  may  be  substituted  for 
them. 

If  any  of  you  feel  as  a result  of  this  Peace  Congress  that 
admiration  for  warfare  is  slipping  out  of  your  grasp,  and  as  if, 
for  the  moment,  you  have  no  hero  whom  you  may  whole-heartedly 
admire,  permit  me  to  suggest  that  new  admirations  too  large  for 
national  bounds  are  developing  in  the  life  of  a cosmopolitan 
people,  that  a gigantic  hero  is  awakening  there — turning  in  his 
sleep  as  it  were.  When  this  hero  is  wide  awake  and  has  come 
into  his  own,  it  is  quite  possible  that  we  will  be  moved  to  give 
him,  not  the  traditional  laurel  wreath  of  the  soldier,  but  the  mar- 
tyr’s crown.  It  is  also  possible  that  in  the  moment  of  decorating 
this  hero  of  the  new  internationalism,  we  may  discover  that 
we  had  hitherto  admired  the  soldier  only  because  he  too  had 
represented  the  spirit  of  the  martyr,  and  had  ever  been  ready  to 
place  his  life  at  the  service  of  a great  cause. 

Dr.  Butler  : 

Before  presenting  the  next  and  last  speaker,  I wish,  on  behalf 
of  the  committee,  and  I am  sure  I may  add  on  behalf  of  this 
audience  as  well,  to  tender  to  the  members  of  the  College  Glee 
Clubs  our  cordial  and  hearty  thanks.  (Applause.) 

At  the  conclusion  of  the  next  speech,  the  Glee  Club  will  lead 
the  audience  in  the  singing  of  “America.”  I take  pleasure  in 
presenting  Mr.  Edwin  D.  Mead,  of  Boston,  whose  voice  and  soul 
have  been  given  to  this  cause  for  a full  generation. 

What  the  Scholar  has  Done  for  Peace 

Edwin  D.  Mead 

Emerson  once  said : “The  Americans  have  little  faith.  They 
rely  on  the  power  of  a dollar ; they  are  dead  to  a sentiment ; and 
no  class  more  faithless  than  the  scholars  or  intellectual  men.” 
Emerson  had  very  strong  provocation  at  the  time  he  spoke.  I 
think  neither  judgment  can  stand  as  a general  proposition.  But 
let  them  stand  as  the  expression  of  his  scorn,  and  our  own,  for 
the  faithless  American  and  the  faithless  scholar.  America,  the 
land  of  great  privilege  and  great  opportunity,  is  pre-eminently 


217 

bound  to  be  the  land  of  idealism;  the  scholar  who  is  deaf  to 
noble  sentiment  is  above  all  men  reprobate. 

On  the  whole,  I believe  that  no  class  of  men  have  been  so 
faithful  and  so  heroic  as  the  world’s  scholars.  It  would  be  a 
terrible  impeachment  if  it  were  not  so — if  knowledge  did  not 
make  for  virtue  and  for  leadership.  Faithless  and  selfish, 
scholars  have  been  often  enough,  but  from  the  time  when 
Moses,  learned  in  all  the  wisdom  of  the  Egyptians,  led  Israel 
up  out  of  Egypt,  and  Paul,  who  had  sat  at  the  feet  of  Gamaliel, 
preached  Christ,  and  Wyclif  and  Luther  and  Melancthon  and 
Calvin  and  their  fellow-workers,  greatest  scholars  of  their  time, 
preached  the  Reformation,  to  the  time  when  Sir  John  Eliot  and 
Hampden  and  Pym  and  Cromwell  and  Milton  and  Vane,  Oxford 
and  Cambridge  scholars  all,  led  the  movement  which  brought 
in  the  English  Commonwealth,  when  scholars  of  Harvard  and 
William  and  Mary — Otis,  Adams,  Hancock,  Jefferson,  Marshall 
— with  Madison  of  Princeton  and  Hamilton  and  Jay  of  Columbia 
here — were  leaders  in  the  struggle  for  American  independence 
and  in  the  creation  of  this  American  republic,  and  when  Sumner 
and  Phillips  and  Channing  and  Parker  and  Emerson  and  Lowell 
fought  to  redeem  the  land  from  slavery — I say  in  all  these  ages 
scholars,  whatever  selfishness  and  recreancy  in  their  class,  have 
been  leaders  and  heroes.  I make  no  foolish  claim,  young  ladies 
and  gentlemen — for  to  you  especially  I speak — for  your  priv- 
ileged class.  None  of  us  ever  forgets  that  Washington  and 
Franklin,  greatest  of  the  founders  of  the  republic,  that  Garrison 
and  Lincoln,  pre-eminent  in  the  anti-slavery  struggle,  were  not 
trained  in  college  halls ; and  especially  I would  not  have  you 
forget  that  the  leaders  in  both  great  struggles,  like  the  leaders 
in  all  great  struggles,  over  and  over,  found  the  great  class  of 
privileged  and  cultivated  men  ranged  like  flint  against  them,  and 
the  “plain  people”  their  support.  Learn  history  just  as  it  is, 
and  see  what  poor  creatures  the  scholars  of  the  past  who  closed 
their  eyes  to  the  call  of  the  future,  appear  to  the  generation  after 
them,  and  see  the  world’s  gratitude  and  obligation  to  her  long  line 
of  scholars  who  had  faith  and  faithfulness. 

If  there  were  a greater  scholar  in  his  time  than  Hugo  Grotius, 
living  in  Holland  at  the  very  time  that  our  fathers  were  in 
exile  there,  it  would  be  hard  to  name  him.  It  would  be  hard  to 


2 18 


name  a nobler  soul.  Himself  presently  in  exile,  he  wrote  there  his 
“Rights  of  War  and  Peace,”  that  great  work  of  which  our  most 
eminent  international  man,  Andrew  D.  White,  has  well  said  that 
no  other  work  not  claiming  divine  inspiration  has  ever  rendered 
equal  service  to  mankind.  With  that  book  international  law 
was  born  almost  full-grown.  Consider  its  two  achievements. 
Our  great  soldier  said — or  did  not  say — that  “war  is  hell” ; but 
there  are  degrees  in  hell — and  the  hell  of  war  to-day  is,  in  point 
of  barbarity,  mild  compared  with  that  at  the  time  of  Grotius’s 
powerful  impeachment.  Since  he  spoke,  too,  how  has  the  senti- 
ment in  behalf  of  arbitration  and  the  reasonable  settlement  ot 
international  quarrels  steadily  grown ! Of  all  men  in  human 
history,  no  other  has  exerted  an  influence  so  profound  in  behalf 
of  the  peace  and  order  of  the  world  as  this  laborious  and  conse- 
crated scholar,  who  sleeps  there  in  the  same  old  church  at  Delft 
where  William  the  Silent  sleeps — the  principal  decorations  of 
his  monument  that  silver  wreath  placed  there  by  our  American 
government. 

Grotius  stood  for  peace;  William  the  Silent  stood  for  free- 
dom; both  stood  for  justice.  Who  was  it  that,  in  showing  the 
indissoluble  dependence  of  universal  peace  upon  free  govern- 
ment and  the  reign  of  law,  stated  the  true  philosophy  of  the 
movement  in  whose  interest  we  are  gathered  here,  more  pro- 
foundly than  it  had  ever  then  been  stated  for  the  modern  world? 
It  was  Immanuel  Kant,  greatest  of  modern  philosophers  and 
most  illustrious  scholar  of  his  time.  Learn  his  “Eternal  Peace,” 
young  ladies  and  gentlemen,  by  heart.  Bind  it  together  with 
Dante’s  “Monarchia,”  that  inspired  dream  of  a united  world, 
which  antedated  Kant’s  “Eternal  Peace”  by  half  a millennium. 

It  is  because  poets  and  scholars  have  had  visions  that  you 
and  I now  have  a program.  It  is  because  there  have  been  Peace 
prophecy  and  Peace  gospel  and  Peace  philosophy,  doing  their 
leavening  work  through  the  long  years,  that  at  last  there  is  a 
Peace  party,  and  the  war  against  war  is  taken  up  by  statesmen 
as  a thing  of  practical  politics,  just  as  the  war  against  slavery 
was.  If  the  world’s  scholars  now  do  their  duty,  Christendom  is 
going  to  be  freed  from  war  in  the  lifetime  of  some  of  you,  just 
as  this  republic  was  freed  from  slavery  in  the  lifetime  of  many 
of  us  still  not  old. 


2ig 

I say  we  have  got  beyond  the  stage  of  protest,  beyond  being 
a movement,  and  are  a party,  with  a program  and  a platform. 
We  are  knocking  at  the  door  of  a World  Parliament,  just  assem- 
bling, and  uniting  with  the  2,500  members  of  the  different  national 
parliaments,  hard-headed  men  of  affairs,  who  constitute  the  Inter- 
parliamentary Union,  in  demanding  the  adoption  of  five  sweeping 
measures : first,  that  this  Parliament  provide  for  its  own  periodical 
and  regular  sessions,  providing  thus  at  a stroke  a true  Parlia- 
ment of  Man ; then,  that  it  frame  and  the  nations  ratify  a general 
arbitration  treaty;  that  it  provide  for  the  limitation  and  then  the 
gradual  proportionate  reduction  of  the  burdensome  armaments  of 
the  nations ; that  it  declare  for  the  immunity  of  all  unoffending 
private  property  at  sea  in  time  of  war;  and,  finally,  that  every 
contested  issue  between  two  nations,  not  settled  by  diplomacy  or 
arbitration,  shall  be  referred  to  an  impartial  commission  for 
investigation  and  report,  before  any  hostilities  or  declaration  of 
war.  With  such  investigation  and  report,  the  cool  reason  of  the 
nations  and  the  public  opinion  of  the  world  can  be  depended  on 
to  make  a war  impossible. 

If  the  scholars  of  America,  the  men  who  share  public  opinion, 
do  their  duty,  every  one  of  those  measures  will  be  embodied  in 
a Hague  convention  before  our  next  college  year  opens  in 
September.  American  public  opinion  is  able  in  this  thing  to  tip 
the  balance. 

What  is  this  coming  Hague  Conference,  with  its  representa- 
tives from  forty-six  nations,  but  that  very  Parliament  of  Man  of 
which  Tennyson  sang,  realized  here  under  our  eyes?  What  have 
American  scholars  done  to  make  possible  this  general  arbitration 
which  the  world  now  demands?  Samuel  Adams,  of  Harvard 
College,  the  “Father  of  the  American  Revolution,”  prepared  a 
memorial  to  Congress  from  Massachusetts,  almost  as  soon  as 
the  Revolution  was  over,  urging  Congress  to  take  steps  in 
co-operation  with  all  nations  with  which  we  had  treaties,  to 
provide  a more  rational  means  than  war  to  settle  international 
differences.  John  Jay  of  New  York  signed  the  first  arbitration 
treaty.  His  son,  Judge  William  Jay,  for  years  the  president  of 
the  American  Peace  Society,  was  the  great  spokesman  of  his 
time  for  arbitration ; and  his  arbitration  plan  was  the  principal 
practical  theme  considered  at  the  first  International  Peace  Con- 
ference at  London  in  1843. 


220 


President  Eliot  has  been  newly  reminding  the  United  States 
and  Canada  that  the  “self-denying  ordinance/’  as  he  well  calls  it, 
by  which  after  the  war  of  1812  they  determined,  instead  of  main- 
taining two  great  naval  squadrons  on  the  Great  Lakes  and  a 
line  of  forts  all  along  the  boundary,  that  they  would  have  nothing 
of  the  sort,  has  pointed  the  true  way  for  the  reduction  of  arma- 
ments and  eventual  disarmament  among  all  nations.  What  has 
been  the  result  of  this  decision  of  the  United  States  and  Canada 
to  act  like  gentlemen  instead  of  like  cowboys?  If  they  had  kept 
up  their  forts  and  frigates,  their  garrisons  and  marines,  there 
would  probably  have  been  friction  a score  of  times,  and  there 
might  have  been  war ; without  them,  there  has  been  Peace,  secur- 
ity, and  mutual  respect.  It  pays  for  nations,  as  well  as  men,  to 
act  like  gentlemen.  A community  of  men  with  pistols  in  their 
pockets  is  not  safer,  and  certainly  not  braver,  than  one  without. 
The  pistol  is  a sign  of  fear,  not  of  courage,  and  it  provokes 
hostility  instead  of  averting  it.  Well,  cannon  and  cruisers  are 
nothing  but  big  pistols;  and  nations  that  parade  them  as  their 
chief  dependence  and  chief  pride,  are  really  still  in  the  cowboy 
stage — as  Emerson  told  us  in  his  pregnant  way  fifty  years  ago. 
It  is  a terrible  mistake  to  think  a bully  with  a pistol  braver  than 
a gentleman  without  one;  he  is  simply  less  civilized.  When  the 
nations  really  become  brave  and  trustful,  instead  of  fearful,  they 
will  simply  have  their  international  police  and  courts,  and  sport 
cannon  no  more  than  gentlemen  in  Fifth  Avenue  sport  pistols. 
Now,  who  was  it  that  taught  the  United  States  and  Canada  a 
century  ago  to  act  like  gentlemen  and  so  be  safe?  It  was  two 
or  three  American  scholars,  acting  in  a very  simple  and  quiet  way. 

I think  of  another  prophetic  thing  to  which  the  United  States 
was  a party,  bearing  upon  another  of  the  five  points  of  our  plat- 
form. The  other  party  to  it  besides  the  United  States  was  Ger- 
many. For  the  first  time  in  many  years,  the  International  Peace 
Congress  meets  this  year  in  Germany — at  Munich,  the  last  of 
August,  I think.  I hope  we  shall  send  a great  American  delega- 
tion— that  every  American  professor  and  American  scholar  in 
Europe  this  summer  will  plan  to  be  at  Munich  then,  to  express 
America’s  friendship  for  the  great  German  nation,  and  the 
peculiar  obligation  of  thousands  of  our  scholars  to  the  German 
universities.  And  I hope  that  somebody  there  will  recall  the  fact 


22 1 


that  the  last  official  act  of  Benjamin  Franklin  in  Europe  was  to 
sign  a treaty  with  the  King  of  Prussia,  then  Frederick  the  Great, 
which  provided  that  in  case  of  war  between  the  two  nations,  the 
private  property  of  the  citizens  of  the  nations  should  not  be  dis- 
turbed. If  the  United  States  and  Canada  have  taught  the  world 
a lesson  in  disarmament,  the  United  States  and  Prussia  taught 
it  a lesson  in  fundamental  international  civilization  on  the  sea. 
You  who  read  Franklin  know  how  long  this  idea  lay  close  to 
his  heart;  and  Franklin,  young  ladies  and  gentlemen,  I call 
a scholar,  a much  better  one  than  most  of  the  bachelors  of  arts. 
The  author  of  our  Declaration  of  Independence,  the  founder 
of  the  University  of  Virginia — and  by  his  inspiration  of  Ann 
Arbor,  also,  and  a score  of  similar  State  universities — was  a 
scholar;  and  in  this  day  when  the  Chinese  boycott  is  teach- 
ing us  its  drastic  lesson,  it  is  profitable  to  study  again  Jefferson’s 
teaching  of  the  superiority  of  commerce  to  guns  as  a mere  instru- 
ment of  coercion,  when  coercion  becomes  necessary. 

But  the  time  would  fail  to  tell  what  scholars  have  done  for 
the  cause  of  international  reason  and  justice  which  brings  us 
together.  And  the  question  is,  what  are  American  scholars  going 
to  do  for  the  cause  at  this  supreme  juncture? 

The  most  impressive  episode,  in  many  ways,  of  the  week  of 
the  International  Peace  Congress  in  Boston  in  1904,  was  the  visit 
of  the  foreign  delegates  to  Mount  Auburn,  that  most  sacred  Poets’ 
Corner  of  ours,  to  lay  wreaths  upon  the  graves  of  the  seven  great 
Apostles  of  Peace  who  are  buried  there. 

One  of  the  seven  was  Charles  Sumner,  greatest  scholar  in  the 
Senate  in  his  time,  who  began  his  public  life  not  in  the  war 
against  slavery,  but  in  the  war  against  war,  which  throughout 
his  life  he  regarded,  as  did  Garrison  himself,  as  the  more  impor- 
tant war  of  the  two.  His  oration  on  the  “True  Grandeur  of 
Nations”  and  his  later  peace  address  constitute,  to  my  thinking, 
the  most  powerful  impeachment  of  the  war  system  to  be  found 
in  the  libraries.  When  Sumner  made  his  will,  he  bequeathed  to 
Harvard  University  $1,000  to  provide  annual  prizes  for  the  best 
essays  on  rational  methods  of  settling  international  differences, 
to  supplant  the  method  of  war.  I wish  that  we  might  see  in  every 
college  and  university  in  the  land  liberal  provisions  for  attention, 
by  essays  and  lectures  and  debates,  to  international  relations  and 


222 


duties.  I rejoice  in  the  movement  inaugurated  at  Mohonk, 
through  the  initiative  of  ex-President  Gilman  of  Johns  Hopkins 
University,  to  this  very  end.  Sumner’s  soul  is  marching  on. 

Sumner  once  said  that  the  greatest  service  which  the  Spring- 
field  Arsenal  ever  rendered  America  was  in  inspiring  Long- 
fellow’s sublime  poem  on  the  unworthiness  of  arsenals  altogether 
in  a so-called  Christian  civilization.  Longfellow  wrote  the  poem 
after  he  and  Sumner  had  visited  the  arsenal  together.  It  was  an 
appeal  for  right  teaching. 

“Were  half  the  power  that  fills  the  world  with  terror, 

Were  half  the  wealth  bestowed  on  camps  and  courts, 
Given  to  redeem  the  human  mind  from  error, 

There  were  no  need  of  arsenals  or  forts.” 

Longfellow  also  was  one  of  the  seven  Apostles  of  Peace  upon 
whose  graves  our  European  friends  laid  their  wreaths.  Another 
was  Lowell,  who,  as.  you  remember  well,  once  wrote : 

“Once  to  every  man  and  nation  comes  the  moment  to  decide, 

In  the  strife  of  Truth  with  Falsehood,  for  the  good  or  evil  side; 

Some  great  cause,  God’s  new  messiah,  offers  each  the  bloom  or 
blight, 

And  the  choice  goes  by  forever  ’twixt  that  darkness  and  that 
light.” 

The  commanding  cause  of  our  time  is  the  war  against  war. 
The  question  in  our  present  crisis  is,  what  shall  America  do,  what 
shall  the  men  of  thought  and  knowledge  who  shape  American 
public  opinion  do,  for  the  World’s  Peace  and  better  organization 
at  this  hour?  The  young  scholar  now  entering  active  life  enters 
it  in  the  most  pregnant  and  momentous  time  in  modern  history. 
China,  with  a quarter  of  the  population  of  the  globe,  is  waking 
up  and  facing  America.  Russia  is  stretching  out  her  hands  to 
God  and  to  liberty-loving  men.  We  are  just  realizing  that  there 
is  a South  America.  We  are  waking  to  the  wrongs  and  the  rights 
of  poor  men,  the  toiling  millions,  whom  wars  and  armaments  are 
robbing.  And,  alas,  we  are  strongly  feeling  the  temptation, 
in  our  eagle’s  flight,  of  the  hoary  old  military  ways  and  vanities 
of  the  past.  The  question  of  the  present  crisis  to  the  American 
scholar  is,  Shall  the  republic  be  true  to  the  principles  of  its  found- 
ers ; shall  it  realize  the  dreams  of  its  prophets  of  Peace  ? 


THE  LIBRARY 
OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLMOfS 


From  Stereograph,  Copyright  1907,  by  Underwood  & Underwood,  New  York. 

Hon.  Nahum  J.  Bachelder  Samuel  Gompers 


Hon.  John  Barrett 


Hon.  William  Jennings  Bryan 


William  McCarroll 


223 


EIGHTH  SESSION 

ORGANIZED  LABOR  IN  RELATION  TO 
THE  PEACE  MOVEMENT 

Cooper  Union 

Tuesday  Evening,  April  Sixteenth,  at  8.15 
MR.  JOSEPH  R.  BUCHANAN  Presiding 

Mir.  Charles  Sprague  Smith  : 

I am  sorry  to  have  to  announce  that  M)r.  Duncan,  who 
was  expected  to  preside  this  evening,  sent  a telegram  at  the 
last  moment  saying  that  on  account  of  conditions  that  had  arisen 
in  his  trade,  it  was  not  possible  for  him  to  be  present,  so  that  the 
presiding  officer  to-night  will  be  Mr.  Joseph  R.  Buchanan,  the 
Chairman  of  the  Local  Committee. 

Mr.  Buchanan  : 

This  meeting  has  been  arranged  by  the  Local  Committee  of 
labor  men  in  conjunction  with  the  People’s  Institute.  It  is 
intended  as  a labor  session  of  the  National  Arbitration  and  Peace 
Congress  now  holding  sessions  in  this  city. 

In  considering  the  substitution  of  arbitration  for  war  as 
a means  of  settlement  of  disputes  between  nations,  it  appears  to 
us  peculiarly  appropriate  that  the  voice  of  labor  should  be  heard. 
Upon  the  workers  fall  the  heaviest  cost  and  the  greatest  burdens, 
which  wait  upon  and  follow  war.  From  their  ranks  come  those 
whose  bodies  stop  the  bullets  from  either  side  in  battle,  and  upon 
their  backs  are  cast  the  burdens  which  war  leaves  behind.  There- 
fore, I say,  we  consider  it  peculiarly  appropriate  in  the  discussion 
of  this  question  that  labor  should  give  expression  to  its  views. 

When  the  time  comes,  and  God  hasten  the  day,  that  the 
workers  of  the  world  shall  be  united  in  a universal  brotherhood, 
and  that  brotherhood  shall  declare  that  no  more  will  the  workers 
of  one  land  take  up  arms  at  the  command  of  some  mercenary  or 


224 

revengeful  ruler  (applause)  against  the  workers  of  some  other 
land,  then,  my  friends,  war  will  cease  (applause),  for,  while  they 
may  declare  war,  there  will  be  none  left  to  fight  its  battles. 
(Applause.) 

I am  very  sorry  that  it  was  necessary  to  make  this  substitu- 
tion of  myself  for  Mr.  Duncan  as  Chairman  of  this  meeting; 
and  I am  very  sorry  to  say  that  some  difficulties  in  organizations 
throughout  the  country  have  prevented  the  attendance  of  others 
of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  whom  we  expected  here 
this  evening.  However,  we  have  not  placed  all  our  eggs  in  one 
basket,  and  I am  satisfied  that  you  will  be  entertained,  edified 
and  instructed  by  those  who  will  speak  to  you  from  this  platform 
to-night. 

It  will  be  in  order  now  for  the  Secretary  of  the  Committee, 
Mr.  Robinson,  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  to  read 
some  telegrams  that  he  has  received  in  relation  to  the  meeting. 

Mr.  Robinson  (reading)  : 

‘‘Philadelphia,  Pa. — Mr.  Herman  Robinson,  25  Third 
Avenue.  Dear  Sir — Regret  that  conditions  have  arisen  in  our 
trade  that  make  it  impossible  to  reach  New  York  to-night. 
Dennis  Hayes.” 

“Quincy,  Mass.,  April  16th — Very  reluctantly  must  forego 
interest  and  pleasure  of  participating  in  to-night’s  meeting.  Unex- 
pected turn  in  trade  dispute  in  this  State  demands  my  attention 
to-day.  Am  to  adjust  by  application  of  Peace  methods,  so  am 
to  that  degree  in  the  good  work.  I stand  squarely  on  Peace 
Resolutions  of  Minneapolis  Convention  bearing  my  name,  and 
wish  Cooper  Institute  meeting  greatest  success.  James  Duncan.” 

Mr.  Buchanan  : The  telegram  just  read  by  the  Secretary 
from  Mr.  Duncan  refers  to  the  resolution  adopted  by  the  Ameri- 
can Federation  of  Labor  at  the  Minneapolis  Convention;  and, 
firmly  believing  that  that  resolution  voices  the  sentiment  of 
labor  on  the  question  before  us,  we  will  present  it  for  action 
at  this  meeting.  The  resolution  will  now  be  read  by  the  Secre- 
tary. 

Mr.  Robinson  (reading)  : 

“Whereas,  The  Delegates  to  the  Minneapolis,  Minnesota, 
Convention  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  November, 
1906,  in  convention  assembled,  believe  that  action  which  makes 


225 

for  the  Peace  of  Nations  is  intimately  bound  up  with  the  welfare 
of  the  workers  of  all  nations,  and  that  labor  should  make  an 
organized  effort  to  aid  the  movement  for  arbitration  on  interna- 
tional disputes;  therefore,  be  it 

“Resolved,  That  the  President  of  the  American  Federation 
of  Labor  is  hereby  instructed  to  send  a copy  of  this  resolution 
to  each  local  union  affiliated  thereto  and  to  each  local  union 
of  affiliated  national  or  international  bodies,  also  to  every  affili- 
ated central  body  and  state  branch,  and  notify  them  that  it  is  the 
sense  of  this  convention  that  each  local  union,  central  or  state 
body  should  communicate  with  their  representatives  in  Congress 
asking  whether  they  belong  to  or  are  in  sympathy  with  the 
Arbitration  Group,  and  requesting  them  and  the  President  of  the 
United  States  to  give  the  support  of  our  government  to  the  reso- 
lutions of  the  Interparliamentary  Union,  regarding  the  subjects 
to  be  discussed  at  the  second  Hague  Conference,  to  the  end  that 
there  shall  be  established : 

“i.  A general  arbitration  treaty.  2.  A periodic  world 
assembly.  3.  Impartial  investigation  of  all  difficulties  before 
hostilities  are  engaged  in  between  nations.  4.  Immunity  ot 
private  property  at  sea  in  time  of  war.” 

This  resolution  was  adopted  at  the  Convention  held  at 
Minneapolis  last  November.  I move,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  this 
resolution,  adopted  by  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  be 
adopted  by  this  meeting. 

Mr.  Buchanan:  You  have  heard  the  motion. 

(Several  voices  seconded  the  motion.) 

Mr.  Buchanan  : Those  in  favor  of  the  adoption  or  re-affir- 
mation of  the  resolutions  as  read  by  the  Secretary  will  say  Aye. 

(There  was  a storm  of  Ayes.) 

Mr.  Buchanan  : The  Ayes  have  it ; so  ordered. 

As  I have  already  announced,  several  of  the  gentlemen  who 
were  to  speak  here  could  not  arrive  on  account  of  trade  matters 
that  are  keeping  them,  and  we  have  had  to  change  the  program, 
so  that  you  will  not  find  upon  the  printed  program  you  have  in 
your  hands  the  names  of  all  the  speakers,  nor  the  order  in  which 
they  will  speak;  but,  as  I have  already  said,  I am  satisfied  that 


15 


226 


you  will  go  away  pleased  with  what  you  will  hear  from  the 
platform  to-night,  notwithstanding  the  disappointment  that  the 
committee  has  met  with.  It  will  not  be  your  disappointment. 

Now  I take  pleasure  in  introducing  as  the  first  speaker  this 
evening  one  of  the  veterans  of  the  labor  movement  in  America — 
the  Hon.  Terence  V.  Powderly.  (Applause.) 

Labor  and  Peace 

Terence  V.  Powderly 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : When  Brother 
Buchanan  intimated  to  me  a few  moments  ago  that  some  of  those 
who  were  to  come  to-night  and  speak  to  you  had  not  arrived, 
and  asked  me  to  help  out,  I inquired  what  he  wanted  me  to  talk 
on,  and  he  said : “Well,  on  the  platform,  and  about  fifteen  min- 
utes.” (Laughter).  So  you  will  not  be  troubled  for  any  length 
of  time  by  me. 

These  are  peaceful  times.  We  are  in  the  days  of  Peace.  It 
is  in  the  air.  It  is  in  the  home,  and  it’s  everywhere.  It  is  the 
talk  of  even  the  fellows  who  are  fighting.  They  are  all  hoping  for 
a day  of  Peace,  and  so  it  is  a hopeful  sign.  It  is  eminently  fit 
and  proper  that  upon  this  platform,  in  this  institution,  labor’s 
voice  should  be  raised  in  behalf  of  Peace,  for  if  any  body  of 
men  in  the  nation,  or  any  element  in  the  nation  longs  for  Peace, 
works  for  it,  strives  for  it  and  honestly  wishes  to  have  it,  that 
element  is  the  labor  element  of  the  nation.  It  may  be  that  because 
we  have  been  in  war,  time  and  again,  that  the  idea  has  grown  that 
we  did  not  want  Peace,  but  it  was  simply  because  conditions 
forced  war  upon  us  that  we  were  obliged  to  enter  upon  it  and 
not  because  we  desired  it.  (Applause.)  To  have  Peace  at  a 
sacrifice  of  honor  is  not  what  man  wants,  particularly  organized 
working  men.  A working  man  desires  honor  first  (applause), 
and  if  that  can  be  had  with  Peace  he  wants  it,  but  if  it  must  be 
got  through  war,  it  will  be  because  he  cannot  get  it  through 
Peace. 

Patrick  Henry  said  over  a hundred  years  ago,  and  when  I 
go  back  a hundred  years  don’t  imagine  that  I am  going  to  stretch 
my  fifteen  minutes  a bit.  (Laughter.)  He  said:  “Three  millions 
of  people  armed  in  the  holy  cause  of  liberty,  and  in  such  a coun- 
try as  that  which  we  possess,  are  invincible  to  any  force  that 


227 

may  be  sent  against  us.”  He  spoke  then  in  the  interest  of 
Peace  and  of  a war  not  yet  begun,  which  he  hoped  would  not 
begin,  but  which  he  did  not  shrink  from  when  the  issues  at 
stake  commanded  him  to  go  forward.  So  to-night  in  that  same 
land,  with  80,000,000  of  people  declaring  for  Peace  through  their 
representatives,  working  for  Peace  through  their  agents,  demand- 
ing Peace  on  every  platform,  why  Peace  will  have  to  come ; it 
must  come;  it’s  in  the  air,  and  no  nation  is  so  well  calculated  or 
so  well  fitted  to  command  Peace  as  ours.  (Applause.) 

How  shall  it  be  brought  about  ? I think  that  labor  and  capital, 
the  employer  and  the  employe,  have  shown  the  way  whereby 
it  may  be  done  or  how  it  may  be  done.  There  was  a time  when 
your  Honored  Chairman  and  I were  in  the  thick  of  the  fight  for 
labor’s  emancipation.  If  any  man  had  said  to  us  that  the 
employers  of  labor  and  the  employed  would  meet  together,  sit 
down  together  as  the  lion  and  the  lamb,  without  the  lamb  being 
on  the  inside,  he  would  have  been  laughed  at ! It  was  not 
dreamed  of  as  among  the  possibilities  then,  but  to-day  the 
employer  and  the  employed  meet,  and  they  take  each  other  by  the 
hand,  instead  of  by  the  neck,  as  they  used  to  do  years  ago.  We 
clasp  hands  to-day,  and  the  voice  of  reason  is  heard. 

Under  the  admirable  leadership  of  a Gompers  (applause)  it 
is  possible  for  labor  to  command  the  respect,  the  close  attention 
and  the  friendly  attitude  of  those  who  employ  labor.  It  could 
not  be  done  years  ago,  for  we  were  tilling  new  ground.  We  were 
not  acquainted  with  each  other  then.  You  know  they  might  think 
that  we  were  all  right,  but  they  did  not  know  it,  and  what  was 
worse,  they  did  not  know  that  we  knew  it. 

A man  was  going  up  to  a farm  house  one  day  when  a dog 
started  after  him.  The  dog  walked  faster  than  the  man  did, 
then  the  man  started  to  run ; the  dog  had  the  best  of  it  again ; so 
when  the  man  got  up  to  the  door,  he  did  not  wait  to  knock ; he 
dispensed  with  the  formality  of  ringing  the  bell,  even ; he  turned 
the  knob,  and  to  his  great  relief  the  door  opened  and  he  walked 
in  and  shut  the  door,  with  the  dog  on  the  outside.  Then  the  man 
of  the  house  came  to  the  door  and  said : “What  is  the  matter 
with  you?  What  is  your  hurry?”  “Why,”  he  answered,  “the 
dog  out  there ; that  big  dog.”  The  man  of  the  house  looked  our 
and  said : “Why,  that  is  only  Bruno,  our  dog;  he  won’t  bite ; don’t 
you  know?”  “Yes,”  he  said,  “I  know  he  won’t  bite ; you  know  he 


228 


won’t  bite,  but  the  dog  don’t  know  it.”  (Laughter.)  We  didn’t 
know  each  other  in  those  days.  We  do  now,  and  we  know  that 
there  is  no  more  potent  voice  in  favor  of  Peace  than  the  voice  of 
labor.  We  know  also  that  there  is  no  more  manly  voice  demand- 
ing Peace  than  the  voice  of  labor.  We  know,  furthermore,  that 
there  is  no  more  consistent  voice  demanding  Peace  than  the  voice 
of  labor.  And  when  after  a while  you  hear  those  who  are  duly 
accredited  to  speak  for  labor  from  this  platform,  you  will  realize 
that  the  few  words  I have  said  to  you  on  that  subject  are  true. 

I made  a lot  of  notes  since  Buchanan  told  me  I had  to  talk, 
but  I won’t  have  to  use  them,  for  my  fifteen  minutes  are  nearly 
ended,  and  fortunately  there  are  others  here  whom  we  did  not 
suppose  would  come.  I will  take  no  more  of  your  time.  I sim- 
ply come  to  you,  as  the  Chairman  said,  as  one  of  the  veterans  of 
the  labor  movement.  There  was  a time  when  I knew  all  about 
the  labor  movement — twenty-five  years  ago;  oh,  yes,  more  than 
that;  there  was  not  anything  in  the  labor  movement  that  I did 
not  know.  And  now  that  I am  fifty-eight  years  young,  I know 
that  all  the  things  that  I thought  I knew  when  I was  twenty-eight 
years  old  did  not  count  for  much.  You  know  I have  forgotten  a 
lot  and  so  will  every  man.  I have  forgotten  that  there  should 
be  enmity  between  those  who  are  dealing  with  a great  public 
question.  I believe  they  should  understand  each  other  and  their 
cause  first  and  foremost,  so  that  when  a difference  arises  they  can 
canvass  the  situation  from  top  to  bottom.  If  all  men  did  that 
always,  there  would  be  no  more  trouble. 

I thank  you  for  the  attention  you  have  given  me  (applause) 
and  I will  ask  you  to  bear  with  me  one  minute.  I have  asked 
the  Chairman  to  use  this  gavel  to-night.  He  used  it  before ; it 
was  used  on  many  occasions  where  he  was  an  officer.  It  has  been 
used  all  over  the  world;  it  has  been  used  always  in  the  interest 
of  Peace,  always  in  a good  and  honorable  cause.  It  will  never 
be  used  in  a bad  cause ; and  I shall  esteem  it  more  highly  after 
to-night,  having  been  once  again  handled  by  my  old  co-worker, 
Joe  Buchanan.  (Applause.) 

Mr.  Buchanan  : 

The  next  speaker  is  at  the  head  of  one  of  the  best-known 
local  labor  organizations,  an  organization  that  is  known  wherever 
trade  unionism  is  known,  an  organization  that  has  found  success 


22Q 

in  times  of  trouble  through  arbitration  and  yet  has  never  been 
found  wanting  when  a fight  was  necessary.  I take  pleasure  in 
introducing  James  J.  Murphy,  President  of  Typographical  Union 
No.  6,  New  York  City.  (Applause.) 

Organized  Labor,  the  Advocate  of  Peace 

James  J.  Murphy 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : The  voice  of  labor 
is  on  the  side  of  Peace.  Especially  is  this  true  of  Union  Labor; 
for  in  the  proportion  that  labor  is  organized  and  has  progressed 
along  the  natural  lines  of  organization,  it  is  intelligent. 

As  education  advances  man  toward  a higher  and  better  civili- 
zation, he  leaves  farther  and  farther  behind  him  the  crudities  and 
cruelties  of  barbarism  and  comes  to  a more  perfect  understanding 
of  the  rights  of  others. 

The  intelligent  workingman  of  this  country  is  a conservator 
of  that  grand  principle  written  in  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence: the  right  to  Life,  Liberty  and  the  pursuit  of  Happi- 
ness. He  sees  in  wars  between  nations  a violation  of  that 
principle — the  destruction  of  Life,  invasion  of  Liberty  and 
obstruction  of  the  pursuit  of  Happiness. 

And  he  sees,  looking  at  the  case  from  a personal  stand- 
point, that  it  is  his  life  which  is  taken,  his  liberty  which  is 
invaded,  and  his  happiness  which  is  obstructed. 

Statesmen,  financiers  and  captains  of  industry  may  and  do 
make  wars,  but  the  workers  fight  the  battles.  (Applause.) 
Those  who  were  the  wives  of  workingmen  before  the  war  are 
their  widows  after  it.  The  children  who  are  left  fatherless  at 
the  battle’s  end  are  the  sons  and  daughters  of  workingmen. 
(Applause.) 

It  is  also  true  that  the  burdens  which  wars  place  upon 
nations  that  engage  in  them  bear  more  heavily  upon  the  workers 
than  upon  any  other  class  of  citizens.  It  is  a pretty  well  recog- 
nized axiom  of  political  economy  that  the  consumer  pays  the 
tax.  All  that  the  workingman  earns  he  consumes — this  I state 
as  a general  proposition — he  is,  therefore,  unable  to  transfer  any 
part  of  his  burden  to  the  account  of  another  through  the  chan- 
nels of  trade,  or  by  any  other  method. 


230 

The  workingman’s  pound  of  tea,  his  plug  of  tobacco,  his 
coat,  his  hat,  his  shoes,  and  the  coats,  hats,  shoes  and  everything 
else  that  his  family  uses,  may  be  taxed,  and  he  has  to  pay  or  go 
without. 

When  any  part  of  this  tax  is  levied  upon  him  for  the  purpose 
of  discharging  the  costs  of  war  he  receives  nothing  in  return. 

The  thousands  of  millions  wrung  by  wars  from  the  brawn 
and  brain  of  Labor  would  construct  a counterpart  of  this  building 
out  of  the  purest  gold  and  garland  yon  columns  with  precious 
gems. 

There  have  been  wars  that  were  fought  to  escape  the  yoke 
of  tyranny,  and,  when  successful,  were  of  immeasurable  benefit 
to  the  liberated,  although  the  cost  in  life  and  treasure  was  some- 
times enormous ; but  these  were  revolutions — peoples  warring 
against  the  injustice  or  cruelty  of  their  own  governments  or 
rulers. 

We  are  here  considering  wars  between  nations.  Such  wars 
are  often  due  to  the  jingoism  of  rulers,  the  casus  belli  often 
being  nothing  more  than  a personal  slight  or  affront,  which  is 
trivial  when  compared  with  the  terrible  cost  of  retaliation. 

There  are  other  wars  which  are  for  the  purpose  of  extending 
markets — to  secure  advantages  in  what  is  called  “doing  busi- 
ness” with  the  people  of  a foreign  country.  And  generally  there 
is  included  among  the  objects  of  wars  of  the  latter  class  the 
desire  to  exploit  the  natural  resources  of  the  contested  country 
and  to  lay  its  people  under  tribute  to  improved  methods  of 
industrial  and  financial  exploitation.  (Applause.) 

Whether  the  object  of  a proposed  war  is  revenge  or  busi- 
ness, those  who,  as  I have  said,  do  the  fighting  and  pay  the  costs, 
are  not  consulted. 

Those  who  imagine  that  their  dignity  or  the  dignity  of 
some  satellite  has  been  slighted,  and  those  who  expect  to 
personally  benefit  by  the  results  of  the  war,  decide  the  issue  and 
then  call  upon  those  whose  counsel  has  not  been  sought  and 
whose  desires  have  not  been  considered  to  do  the  fighting  and 
bear  the  burdens. 

The  intelligent  workers  of  all  lands  are  beginning  to  under- 
stand these  truths,  and,  as  they  have  come  to  see  that  their  class 
has  been  used  to  satisfy  the  jingoism  of  political  leaders  and 


231 

the  cupidity  of  mercenary  business  interests,  they  have  also 
learned  the  truth  of  the  Brotherhood  of  Man. 

While  not  lacking  by  one  heart-beat  the  full  measure  of  that 
love  of  country  which  we  call  “patriotism” ; while  bowing  the 
head  to  his  country’s  flag  with  a reverence  not  one  whit  less 
than  was  felt  by  those  who  came  and  went  before  him,  the 
workingman  of  to-day  has  reached  a plane  from  which  he  can 
see  and  appreciate  the  love  of  country  and  flag  felt  by  his  brother 
across  the  border  or  on  the  ocean’s  other  side,  and  he  protests 
against  murdering  or  being  murdered  by  that  brother. 
(Applause.) 

Applause  or  laudation  may  bring  the  flush  of  foolish  pride 
to  the  unthinking  or  forgetful  “man  behind  the  gun,”  but  the 
enlightened,  progressive  man  of  labor  carries  a heart  full  of 
sympathy  and  compassion  for  the  man  in  front  of  the  gun. 

When  jingoism  stalked  from  end  to  end  of  the  British  Isles, 
lashing  itself  into  a fury  as  it  bellowed  for  war  in  South  Africa, 
but  one  considerable  element  raised  its  voice  in  opposition  and 
appealed  for  other  and  less  brutal  ways  of  settling  the  existing 
troubles.  That  voice  was  the  voice  of  Union  Labor,  speaking 
through  chosen  representatives.  Though  the  plea  fell  upon  deaf 
ears,  and  one  of  the  least  justifiable  and  most  mercenary  of  wars 
was  cruelly  carried  to  the  bitter  end,  all  Great  Britain  to-dav 
sadly  regrets  that  the  Government  turned  its  back  upon  the 
spokesman  of  Union  Labor,  who  counselled  Peace  and  propheti- 
cally foretold  the  disappointment  which  would  follow  such  a war 
as  was  proposed  by  the  jingoes  and  their  mercenary  allies. 

In  conclusion  I repeat  that  Labor — Organized  Labor — is  on 
the  side  of  Peace. 

Because  of  the  inherent  selfishness  of  mankind — which  has 
not  yet  learned  wisdom,  and  because  of  our  industrial  system 
and  the  conditions  contingent  thereto,  trades  unionism  is  still  a 
militant  movement;  but  it  is  constantly  striving  to  bring  about 
the  substitution  of  the  Court  of  Reason  for  the  murderous  contest 
of  force  in  the  settlement  of  differences  between  opposing 
interests. 

That  arrogant  defiance  of  Peace,  that  virulent  microbe  of 
strife,  “Nothing  to  arbitrate,”  had  not  its  birth  in  the  Trade 
Union,  and  rarely  does  it  find  a friend  there.  We  advocate 


232 

arbitration  as  a substitute  for  open  conflict  between  ourselves 
and  our  employers  and,  adapting  a thought  recently  expressed 
by  Andrew  Carnegie,  we  believe  that  what  is  good  for  use  at 
home  is  good  for  use  abroad. 

Therefore,  I confidently  say  that  the  Trades  Unions  of  the 
United  States — and,  I believe,  the  Trades  Unions  of  all  countries 
— are  pledged  to  the  accomplishment  of  the  principles  enunciated 
by  the  Hague  Conference  and  will  do  everything  within  their 
power  to  assist  in  that  good  work. 

No  one  more  than  the  Trade  Unionist  hopes  for  the  early 
fulfilment  of  this  prophecy  of  that  great  son  of  France,  Victor 
Hugo,  who  said : “In  the  twentieth  century  wars  will  cease,  and 
men  the  world  over  will  be  brothers.”  (Great  applause.) 

Mr.  Buchanan  : 

I am  sure  the  audience  will  agree  when  I say  that  the 
Executive  Council  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  which 
is  absent  in  the  person  of  three  or  four  of  its  members  who 
were  expected  to  be  here,  has  been  fully  and  ably  represented 
upon  the  platform  to-night.  (Applause.) 

Now,  my  friends,  while  you  do  the  fighting  in  times  of  war, 
the  other  sex  bears  probably  the  heavier  burden  and  carries  in  its 
breast  the  aching  heart ; therefore,  no  meetings  in  the  interests  of 
Peace  would  be  complete  if  the  voice  of  woman  were  not  heard. 
It  therefore  affords  me  great  pleasure  now  to  introduce  as  the 
next  speaker  a woman  who  has  been  one  of  the  workers  in  the 
cause  of  labor  for  a quarter  of  a century,  and  who  represents 
upon  this  platform  to-night  the  Women’s  Trade  Union  League 
of  New  York,  Miss  O’Reilly.  (Applause.) 

The  Cry  of  Humanity 

Miss  Leonora  O’Reilly 

Friends,  Fellow  Workingmen  and  Fellow  Working- 
women  : I feel  very  much  like  saying,  after  having  listened  to 
the  speeches  which  have  already  been  made,  Peace ! we  are  going 
to  have  Peace,  even  if  we  fight  for  it.  (Applause  and  laughter.) 

One  of  our  American  writers  has  said  that  at  every  moment 
some  one  country  more  than  any  other  represents  the  sentiment 
of  the  future  of  mankind.  What  a glorious  thing  if  from  this 


233 

Republic  of  ours,  we  could  send  forth  such  a message  for  the 
future  of  mankind.  Peace  we  must  have,  no  matter  how  we 
come  by  it. 

Thus  far,  so  far  as  I know,  the  world  has  seen  only  two 
forms  of  civilization : the  military  and  the  industrial ; and  the 
industrial  form  of  civilization  is  only  just  beginning  to  appear. 

In  looking  up  a definition  of  war  to  bring  before  this  audi- 
ence, I found  in  one  of  our  encyclopaedias  this  definition : “The 
History  of  War  is  the  history  of  the  Human  Race.”  Now 
friends,  I want  you  to  think  of  that — the  history  of  war  is  the 
history  of  the  human  race — then,  don’t  you  think  we  had  better 
begin  and  rewrite  the  history  of  the  human  race?  (Applause.) 
And  who  could  better  write  that  history  than  working  men  and 
working  women?  (Applause.)  We  certainly  have  helped  to 
carry  on  the  industrial  fight.  Who,  then,  could  better  write  the 
true  story? 

One  fact  not  generally  known  about  the  labor  movement  is 
that,  when  we  get  inside  the  great  industrial  army,  we  really 
forget  whether  the  soldier  is  man  or  woman.  We  simply  want 
to  be  part  of  the  great  world’s  work.  And  I want,  so  much,  to 
have  you  understand  what  that  definition  meant  to  me,  a worker 
and  I hope  to  have  it  mean  as  much  to  you,  working  men 
and  working  women.  Think  of  it!  Must  it  be  so?  Is  it  true 
that  the  history  of  the  human  race  is  war?  War  means  destruc- 
tion. Ah,  no ! Isn’t  it  that  we  have  only  had  the  microbe  of  con- 
quest in  our  heads  and  hearts  ? We  have  not  really  learned  what 
brotherhood  and  sisterhood  means.  We  have  not  really  learned 
the  lesson  of  the  labor  movement,  that  we  are  brother  and  sister 
all  the  world  over.  (Applause.) 

Glad  indeed  am  I to  be  so  honored  as  to  be  asked  to  come  and 
speak  my  word  for  organized  women  at  this  Peace  Meeting.  The 
gentleman  has  said  truly  that  while  the  men  are  fighting  in  the 
field,  the  women  must  carry  on  all  the  other  work.  Women 
have  work  enough  in  times  of  Peace,  but  try  to  think,  try  to 
imagine  what  a woman’s  part  is  when  the  men  go  to  be  shot 
down  in  battle.  (Applause.)  Not  only  do  they  carry  on  all  the 
industries  that  men  carry  on  in  times  of  Peace,  but  then  they 
must  also  do  the  work  as  mothers  and  wives.  Just  think  of  that. 
Surely,  no  matter  how  weak  the  voice  of  woman,  it  must  be 


234 

heard  in  this  Peace  Congress;  and  especially  the  voice  of  the 
woman  or  organized  labor  must  be  heard,  for,  if  the  future  of 
our  land  is  to  be  a peaceful  and  an  industrial  one,  it  must  be 
brought  about  by  the  intelligence  of  the  organized  workers. 

A Voice:  Good  boy!  (Great  applause  and  laughter,  in 

which  latter  the  speaker  joined.) 

Miss  O’Reilly: 

I take  off  my  hat  to  the  brother  in  the  back  of  the  room 
because  he  has  acknowledged  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  sex 
in  the  labor  movement.  (Great  applause  and  cries  of  “good!”) 

You  ask  what  is  the  attitude  of  the  labor  movement  towards 
war?  Have  we  got  to  ask  ourselves  that  question?  Don’t  we 
all  know  it  in  our  hearts?  Don’t  we  all  carry  it  in  the  very 
marrow  of  our  being?  Wasn’t  it  the  workingmen’s  international 
movement  fifty  years  ago  that  said,  “You  will  never  establish 
Peace  until  you  abolish  all  your  standing  armies”?  Now,  I am 
not  advocating  the  abolition  of  one  standing  army  as  against 
another,  but  I do  not  believe  that  you  can  have  Peace  while  you 
are  preparing  for  war.  Peace  will  not  be  attained  to-day,  but 
we  must  look  to  that  future  which  we  intend  to  reach.  There- 
fore, I maintain,  the  works  of  the  world  belong  to  the  great 
constructive  force  of  the  world  and  cannot  for  their  life’s  sake 
have  anything  to  do  with  war  or  the  destructive  side. 
(Applause.)  If  we  mean  Peace,  we  must  go  about  it  honestly 
and  honorably.  (Applause.)  So  I believe  with  those  work- 
ingmen of  fifty  years  ago,  if  we  really  mean  Peace,  then  we  must 
advocate  those  measures  which  will  do  away  with  war.  You 
cannot  train  men  to  be  soldiers  and  then  ask  them  to  be  anything 
else.  You  cannot  ask  them  not  to  make  use  (applause)  of  the 
training  which  you  have  spent  your  substance  to  give  them. 

Now  I am  reminded  of  the  story  of  the  Irishman,  who  was 
supposed  to  believe  in  predestination.  A neighbor  saw  him 
going  out  with  a gun  on  his  shoulder  and  said : “Why,  Pat,  I 
thought  you  believed  in  predestination?”  “So  I do,  but  perhaps 
the  other  fellow’s  time  has  come.”  (Laughter.)  Now  while  we 
have  our  armies  and  navies  trained,  you  will  notice  it  is  always 
the  thought  that  the  other  fellow’s  time  may  have  come.  You 
can’t  preach  brotherhood  in  that  way.  (Applause.)  However, 
whatever  we  may  think  on  that  score,  we  do  want  Peace.  The 


235 

majority  of  our  people  want  Peace,  and  I think  we  want  to  send 
a message  to  The  Hague  which  will  make  them  understand,  not 
only  that  the  people  here,  but  people  all  over  the  world  want 
Peace.  (Applause.)  In  reading  over  the  messages  and  the 
thoughts  of  all  the  splendid  minds  to-day  which  are  concen- 
trating themselves  on  the  thought  of  Peace,  and  what  best  we 
can  do  to  attain  the  blessings  of  peace,  it  came  upon  me  like  a 
horror  that  over  nineteen  hundred  years  ago  we  had  the 
Nazarene,  the  Man  who  has  always  been  called  “The  Prince  of 
Peace,”  and  yet  in  our  midst  to-day  one  of  the  followers  of  that 
Gospel,  one  of  the  followers  of  that  Prince  of  Peace,  asserts  that 
there  can  be  no  such  thing  as  Peace,  and  thanks  God  for  a 
standing  army  which  keeps  watch  over  the  turbulent  and  sedi- 
tious of  our  city.  I only  mention  this  to  ask  what  it  is  that 
makes  so  many  of  us  get  so  twisted  in  our  mentality,  if  not  in 
our  morality,  for  surely  if  ever  a being  lived  who  wanted  Peace, 
it  was  the  Nazarene,  the  gentle  Carpenter.  (Applause.)  And 
we  find  to-day  one  of  His  followers  at  the  International  Peace 
Conference  thanking  God  for  the  standing  armies. 

A Voice:  Never  was  His  follower. 

Miss  O’Reilly: 

Never  was  His  follower?  Perhaps  not.  I think  a great 
many  people  who  think  they  are  His  followers,  let  themselves 
out  once  in  a while  and  then  we  know  them  for  what  they  are. 
(Applause.) 

But  surely  the  solidarity  of  the  human  race  will  never  be 
accomplished  until  the  workers  of  the  world  unite  for  its  accom- 
plishment. (Applause.  A voice,  “Bravo  !”) 

I should  have  said  that  the  feeling  which  came  into  my 
heart  when  I read  that  minister’s  utterances  is  the  old,  old 
thought  which  makes  me  say  once  again : Workers  of  the  World, 
you  must  teach  this  Peace  doctrine  yourselves,  if  you  want  it 
taught.  You  organized  workers  know  that  the  A B C of  the 
labor  movement  teaches  that  the  solidarity  of  the  human  race 
will  never  be  accomplished  until  the  workers  of  the  world  unite 
for  its  accomplishment,  namely,  by  agitation,  organization  and 
education.  Those  are  our  three  methods  of  Peace.  (Great 
applause.)  And  if  we  but  do  that  work,  we  have  very  little  time 
for  the  work  of  destruction.  You  know  we  are  many,  and  we 
need  a great  deal  of  education  to  get  us  to  see  things  straight 


236 

and  clear  and  not  be  fighting  amongst  ourselves  in  our  own  little 
places.  (Applause.)  We  have  got  to  learn  that  labor’s  cause  is 
the  same  all  over  the  world.  (Applause.)  When  we  get  that 
into  our  hearts  and  souls,  we  won’t  fight  very  much  longer.  We 
won’t  have  very  many  battles.  When  we  understand  that  labor’s 
cause  is  a universal  cause,  it  will  not  be  possible  to  get  the 
Frenchmen  to  come  out  and  fight  the  Germans,  and  the  Germans 
to  come  out  and  fight  the  Irishmen.  We  know  that  our  business 
is  to  establish  the  dignity  of  labor;  on  that  we  must  first  agree, 
and  then  try  to  make  us  fight  on  any  other  issues  if  you  can ! 
(Applause.) 

I don’t  know  whether  you  know  that  story  that  Carlyle  tells 
of  Dumbdrudges,  or  as  he  calls  it,  the  Town  of  Dumbdrudge.  He 
says  that  in  a certain  town  there  were  certain  people  brought 
up  at  the  expense  of  the  community;  they  were  brought  up,  fed, 
taught  trades;  then  they  were  dressed  up  in  red  coats  or  some* 
thing  of  that  kind,  and  guns  put  in  their  hands ; and  then  in 
another  corner  of  the  world  there  was  another  group  of  people 
who  were  brought  up  and  taught  trades,  crafts,  and  educated 
and  sustained  at  the  cost  of  the  community,  and  those  two  sets 
of  people,  for  some  reason  or  another,  were  brought  together 
face  to  face  and  somebody  said  “Fire!”  Then  there  were  sixty 
fewer  human  beings  in  the  world.  They  fired  simply  because 
they  were  told,  and  shot  each  other  down.  Then  in  his 
grumbling  Scottish  way  he  said:  “Did  these  men  have  any- 
thing against  each  other?”  “No.”  “Then  why  did  they  do  this 
thing?”  “Simpleton!  their  governors  had  fallen  out;  and  in- 
stead of  shooting  one  another,  had  the  cunning  to  make  these  poor 
blockheads  shoot.” 

How  much  better  is  the  story  that  Lafcadio  Hearn  tells  about 
the  singer.  It  is  the  story  about  a singing  woman  with  a beau- 
tiful voice  that  Lafcadio  Hearn  heard,  a voice  that  comes  out 
of  an  ugly  mouth  and  from  a face  that  is  pockmarked.  Out  of 
that  ugly  face  and  from  the  mouth  of  that  human  being  comes 
a song  that  is  so  glorious,  so  beautiful,  that  he,  a foreigner,  under- 
stands there  is  something  in  it  which  touches  all  of  humanity. 
It  is  as  if  the  cry  of  all  the  people  of  all  the  ages  were  stirred  in 
him  and  he  wanted  to  do  something  on  his  part  towards  the  up- 
lifting of  humanity.  It  seems  to  me  that  that  is  the  lesson  that 
organization  teaches  to  every  member  of  organized  labor.  We 


237 

may  be  ugly  and  do  strange  things,  not  the  right  kind  of  things 
sometimes,  things  that  cannot  be  explained  to  the  rest  of  the 
world,  but  that  crv,  that  song  that  we  are  teaching  is  the  unity  of 
the  human  race.  We  are  doing  it  in  the  best  way  that  we  can. 
We  are  trying  to  sing  our  song  of  construction,  brotherhood  and 
humanity,  and  we  must  not  let  it  be  interrupted  by  these  thoughts 
of  war,  or  be  led  to  war  with  each  other  for  petty  reasons.  Our 
cause  must  be  a common  cause  for  the  uplifting  of  humanity, 
and  that  re-writing  of  history. 

Now  if  I should  finish  with  that  thought,  I fear  you  might 
think  I was  only  a sentimental  woman  after  all,  one  that  does 
not  know  about  things  practical.  So  I am  going  to  be  just  a little 
bit  practical  in  the  end,  because  you  know  we  are  not  supposed 
to  have  sentiment  these  days ; the  practical  people  are  the  only 
people  who  count  or  do  anything,  so  we  are  told.  But  now  I 
want  you  to  think  what  is  the  cost  of  our  wars,  what  is  the  cost 
of  the  standing  armies,  and  what  we  lose  by  lack  of  production, 
and  the  cost  to  us  by  the  increased  taxation,  the  frightful  waste 
of  human  life,  and  the  great  loss  of  time  from  profitable  occupa- 
tions in  this  useless  and  wasteful  occupation  of  slaughtering 
each  other.  Think  of  the 'waste  that  goes  on  in  that!  I may 
not  be  perfectly  correct  in  my  quoting  of  figures,  but  wasn’t  it  a 
million  dollars  a day  that  the  Japanese  war  cost?  The  Russian 
side  surely  cost  as  much  as  the  Japanese.  That  makes  two  million 
dollars  a day  as  the  cost  of  that  war  in  figures.  Multiply  that 
by  365  days,  a year,  and  that  war  lasted  more  than  a year,  and 
we  have  $730,000,000  spent  for  destruction. 

We  are  beginning  to  think  in  this  country  that  there  can  be 
some  kind  of  industrial  education  for  children,  that  there  should 
be  some  kind  of  industrial  preparation  for  life.  If  we  are  going 
to  do  away  with  war,  we  must  put  Peace  on  the  best  foundation, 
and  that  is  the  training  up  of  the  children  for  the  work  they  are 
going  to  perform. 

Now,  at  a rough  estimate,  it  costs  $150  a year  after  the 
public  school  education  to  get  one  of  these  children  through  a 
training  school  which  prepares  him  or  her  to  do  the  work  that 
his  hands  are  trained  to  do.  According  to  that  estimate,  then, 
we  could  have  educated  industrially  4,800,000  children  for  the  cost 
of  that  one  year  of  war.  Now  those  are  figures  that  we  ought  to 
think  of,  and  as  a woman  I want  to  insist  that  when  we  disband 


238 

our  armies  and  navies,  we  should  use  those  splendid  warships 
for  taking  the  children  around  the  world.  (Great  applause.) 
Horribly  impracticable,  I know,  to  ask  a thing  like  that,  but  yet 
I believe  I am  going  to  live  to  see  the  day  when  it  will  be  done. 
(Applause.) 

One  thing  I hope  we  will  advocate  at  these  Peace  Confer- 
ences. It  is  always  a good  plan  to  see  far  into  the  future  and  to 
ask  for  all  you  ever  hope  to  realize ; ask  for  the  whole  thing,  then 
you  may  get  a little  speck.  (Applause.)  But  ask  for  all  you  want ; 
it  may  take  you  years  to  lead  up  to  it,  but  right  in  the  beginning, 
know  your  ideal.  Therefore  I advocate  the  abolition  of  all  wars. 
(Applause.)  But  I do  hope  that  somebody  will  advocate  that 
practical  measure  which  I have  read  the  French  teachers  advo- 
cate. I read  that  the  French  teachers  in  their  Council  have  ad- 
vocated the  taking  down  of  all  ornaments  from  the  school  rooms 
which  have  anything  to  do  with  militarism.  Now  you  see  they 
realize  that  if  in  the  young  heart  of  the  child  you  develop  the  wor- 
ship of  the  soldier  as  a hero,  you  cannot  get  the  idea  of  militarism 
out  of  his  head  when  he  grows  up.  You  must  inspire  the  child 
when  he  is  young,  and  in  order  to  do  this  you  must  surround  him 
with  the  right  kind  of  environment.  Don’t  have  on  the  walls 
pictures  of  heroes  in  the  shape  of  soldiers,  or  pictures  of  bloody 
battles  as  inspiring  things  for  the  young  mind  to  look  upon. 
(Applause.) 

I believe  firmly  that  what  you  know  as  civilization — I was 
going  to  tell  you  I don’t  think  very  much  of  the  civilization  we 
have  thus  far  (applause) — but  what  we  know  as  civilization  to- 
day can  only  improve  and  advance  with  the  passing  of  militarism, 
and  you,  the  workers,  you  in  your  numbers,  must  send  your  voice 
across  the  ocean  so  that  there  will  be  no  mistaking  your  stand  on 
this  Peace  and  war  question.  Let  your  voice  ring  loud  and  clear, 
that  organized  labor  stands  once  and  for  all  for  organization,  co- 
operation and  the  solidarity  of  humanity.  (Great  applause.) 

Mr.  Buchanan  . 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : ft  is  my  pleasure  to  introduce  to 
you  one  of  the  labor  men  who  has  won  a place  of  prominence,  not 
on  the  field  of  battle,  but  in  the  line  of  civic  duty.  I am  going  to 
introduce  to  you  now  the  Secretary  of  State  for  the  State  of  New 
York.  He  is  eligible  to  speak  upon  this  platform  because  he  is  a 


239 

member  of  the  Tobacco  Workers’  Union  and  President  of  the 
Rochester  Trade  and  Labor  Council — John  S.  Whalen,  Secretary 
of  State  of  New  York.  (Applause). 

Mr.  John  S.  Whalen: 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen,  as  well  as 
Fellow  Unionists:  I came  to  New  York  more  particularly  to 
learn  and  to  hear  many  of  the  things  that  are  being  spoken  of  in 
convention  here.  I have  attended  many  of  the  conferences.  I 
hope  that  I am  not  amiss  when  I say  it  is  a pleasure  and  honor 
to  attend  a labor  gathering  such  as  this.  And  I might  say  in  the 
few  short  moments  allotted  me,  and  will  say,  that  three  of  the 
best  arguments  I have  heard  during  my  entire  stay  in  the  city 
were  advanced  here  this  evening.  (Applause.) 

There  is  little  if  anything  new  in  this  proposition  to  me.  I 
have  been  a member  of  the  Trades  Union  movement  for  fifteen 
long  years,  and  I realize  that  in  that  movement  we  have  been 
working  honestly  and  earnestly  towards  Peace.  My  belief,  and 
one  saying  that  I have  always  used  in  the  Trades  Union  move- 
ment is,  “Practice  what  you  preach ; do  by  the  other  fellow  as  you 
wish  to  be  done  by.”  It  is  a simple,  easy  teaching,  and  we  take 
the  same  stand  to-day  as  we  have  always  taken ; and  I repeat  that 
the  remarks  from  the  gentlemen  and  lady  who  have  preceded  me 
have  been  the  most  practical  talks  I have  heard  during  this  entire 
conference  in  the  city  of  New  York. 

There  are  other  speakers  here  to-night.  I did  not  expect  to 
have  this  pleasure,  and  I am  merely  going  to  occupy  the  few  mo- 
ments allotted  to  me  and  give  way  to  the  speaker  who  will  take 
up  the  subject  more  in  detail.  I thank  you. 

Mr.  Buchanan  : 

The  next  speaker  of  the  evening  is  a gentleman  not  directly 
connected  with  the  labor  movement,  but  one  whose  sympathies 
are  with  it  and  whose  efforts  are  expended  in  assisting  it — the 
Rev.  Dr.  Algernon  S.  Crapsey,  of  Rochester.  (Applause.) 

The  Squirearchy  of  Peace 

Dr.  Algernon  S.  Crapsey 

Mr.  President  and  Gentlemen  and  Ladies:  I am  at 
this  moment  engaged  in  solving  a problem  which  is  of  some 


240 

interest  to  me.  I am  endeavoring  to  discover  who  I am. 
(Laughter.)  I have  two  programs  in  my  hand,  and  in  one  of 
them  I am  designated  as  an  Esquire  and  in  the  other  I have  two 
initials  after  my  name.  Now  I prefer  to  take  the  former  title 
to-night,  because  I find  that  it  is  a title  which  has  been  given  to 
all  the  previous  speakers.  All  of  us  have  been  ennobled.  We 
belong  now  to  the  titled  nobility  of  the  earth.  (Laughter.) 
Mr.  Samuel  Gompers  is  an  Esquire,  and  Mr.  Murphy  likewise, 
and  so  to-night  I prefer  to  speak  in  the  name  of  the  Squirearchy 
rather  than  of  the  Doctors  of  Divinity.  (Laughter.)  Because, 
I will  have  you  understand,  the  squire  is  a very  considerable 
man  in  the  world.  He  had  his  origin  at  the  time  when  knight- 
hood was  in  flower.  He  was  usually  some  slip  of  the  nobility, 
who  was  sent  to  learn  the  trade  of  fighting,  and  his  business  was 
to  look  after  his  knight,  to  burnish  his  armor,  to  sharpen  his 
spear,  to  hang  properly  his  mace,  and  to  saddle  and  bridle  his 
horse  and  hold  the  horse  until  the  knight  mounted;  and  then  in 
due  time  he  expected  himself  to  become  a knight  and  go  out 
fighting  on  his  own  account.  And  so  these  squires  had  their 
place  in  the  world  until  the  time  that  knighthood  came  to  an  end. 

In  the  meanwhile  the  Squirearchy  had  been  learning  some 
truths ; the  squire  had  been  ascertaining  the  fact  that  this  fighting 
business  was  not  all  it  had  been  cracked  up  to  be.  (Laughter.) 
Sometimes  he  got  a broken  head ; and  then,  owing  to  certain 
developments  that  went  on,  he  found  that  his  sword  was  of  little 
or  no  account;  so  when  the  knighthood  period  passed  away,  we 
find  that  the  squire  settled  down  on  the  land  and  bought  a farm 
and  married  a wife  and  got  for  himself  children  and  began  to 
spend  his  days  in  other  occupations.  Then  he  came  to  learn  that 
there  are  other  things  in  the  world  worth  doing  as  well  as  fighting. 
He  began  to  discover  that  communion  with  his  wife  and  children ; 
that  the  song  of  the  birds  and  the  coloring  of  the  flowers,  were 
worth  while.  And  when  he  was  no  longer  occupied  in  putting 
his  brother  man  to  death,  he  had  time  to  enter  into  these,  and 
he  became,  in  a measure,  a civilized  man,  and  an  artist. 

And  now,  we,  the  Squirearchy,  in  whose  name  I speak 
to-night,  come  with  certain  thoughts  concerning  war.  We  have 
in  a measure  outgrown  the  knighthood  period,  and  we  have  in  a 
measure  outgrown  the  whole  war  period.  We  do  not  come 


241 

to-night  to  cast  reflections  upon  our  ancestors,  and  we  do  come 
to-night  as  warriors.  We  are  such  by  birthright,  and  our  only 
contention  is  that  war  shall  be  carried  on  according  to  methods 
which  are  now  required  by  the  progress  of  the  age. 

The  old  means  of  carrying  on  a war  are  obsolete.  We  have 
reached  a point  in  our  development  where  it  is  no  longer  good 
taste  on  the  part  of  two  men  who  differ  to  black  one  another’s 
eyes,  or  to  give  one  another  a bloody  nose,  or  to  knock  the 
breath  out  of  one  another.  That  is  not  good  form  any  more 
between  man  and  man.  There  may  be  in  this  company  some 
who  differ  with  me;  there  may  be  some  here,  some  Bowery  boys 
(laughter)  that  still  think  that  the  noble  art  of  self-defence  is 
absolutely  necessary  for  maintaining  the  dignity  and  the  stability 
of  human  nature,  and  that  to  give  a good  rounder  with  the  right 
hand  and  another  with  the  left  is  the  way  to  establish  a repu- 
tation as  a man.  (Laughter.)  But  we,  the  Squirearchy,  have 
outgrown  that,  and  we,  as  I say,  no  longer  consider  that  polite 
or  good  form;  and  therefore  our  first  objection  to  the  present 
method  of  carrying  on  war  is  that  it  is  not  in  good  taste;  ana 
it  doesn’t  make  any  difference  whether  you  brain  a man  with 
your  fist  or  do  it  with  a fist  of  mail,  or  whether  you  stand  behind 
your  fist  or  stand  behind  a gun ; it  is  a foul  thing  to  take  that 
wonderful  organ,  the  human  brain,  and  scatter  it  upon  the  earth 
and  trample  it  down  and  destroy  all  its  capacity  for  beauty  of 
thought.  That  is  our  first  objection.  We  say  it  is  bad  taste.  It 
is  not  esthetic,  and  if  any  man  wants  to  understand  what  war  is, 
let  him  go  out  the  day  after  the  battle.  It  is  just  as  repulsive 
to  see  the  human  flesh  in  the  raw,  when  that  human  flesh  is  put 
in  the  raw  by  the  instruments  of  modern  warfare,  as  it  is  to  see 
it  in  the  prize  ring,  and  therefore  when  two  nations  come 
together  for  the  purpose  of  simply  engaging  in  this  amusement, 
we  prefer  to  withdraw.  (Applause  and  laughter  and  cries  ot 
“good !”) 

Our  second  objection  is  that  this  method  of  settling  disputes 
is  very  wasteful.  In  the  good  old  times,  when  men  fought 
hand  to  hand,  war  was  not  so  expensive  as  it  is  now,  but 
it  was  then  expensive  enough,  and  our  good  squire  who  went 
out  after  his  knight  to  the  battle  and  who  spent  some  years  in 
his  own  campaign,  came  back  a poorer  man  than  he  went.  And 


16 


242 

when  the  great  wars  of  the  Middle  Ages  closed,  then  a large 
proportion  of  those  squires  were  turned  adrift  and  found  them- 
selves poverty-stricken  in  the  world,  and  they  had  to  lie  naked 
upon  the  ground,  and  they  came  to  the  conclusion  that  it  was 
wiser  for  them  to  spend  their  money  in  sustaining  themselves 
than  to  spend  it  in  destroying  others.  We  have  already  had 
brought  out  before  us,  by  the  previous  speaker,  the  immense  waste- 
fulness of  our  modern  warfare.  We  take  of  our  substance  and 
we  cast  it  into  cannon  balls,  and  I am  told  it  costs  about  three 
thousand  dollars  to  fire  a cannon  once.  Why  that  is  more  than 
I get  in  a year!  (Laughter.)  And  so  this  is  our  second  objec- 
tion— the  wastefulness.  Why,  surely,  we  can  settle  our  disputes 
more  economically  than  this. 

And  then  our  third  objection  is  that  it  is  very  stupid.  I 
was  down  a short  time  ago  in  Virginia  and  I came  across  a bow- 
legged  negro,  an  old  plantation  negro,  and  we  got  into  conver- 
sation about  the  late  unpleasantness  between  the  states,  and 
this  man  said  to  me : “Dar  was  good  men  on  bofe  sides, 
but  they  didn’t  have  ’telligence  ’nuff  to  think  it  out,  and  so 
they  had  to  fight  it  out”  (laughter),  and  that  is  the  situation 
always.  It  is  lack  of  intelligence,  it  is  sheer  stupidity  that  leads 
men  to  substitute  force  for  reason.  When  men  are  intelligent, 
they  can  sit  down  and  reason  out  their  differences,  and  they  can 
come  to  some  mode  of  living  together,  but  it’s  the  stupid  men 
that  have  to  resort  to  a fight  in  order  to  decide  these  questions 
between  men  and  men.  (Applause.)  And,  my  dear  friends,  of 
all  the  stupid  men  that  are  born  into  this  world,  nine-tenths  of 
them  get  into  places  of  government. 

You  know  how  it  was  in  the  days  of  the  terror  in  France 
when  poor  Robespierre  was  in  command.  Robespierre  came  to 
the  conclusion  at  last  that  the  terror  was  a blunder,  but  the 
poor  fellow  did  not  have  wit  enough  to  see  any  other  way  and 
so  he  said : ‘‘Let  the  terror  go  on.”  And  so  there  be  those 
to-day  in  command  of  our  governments  all  over  the  earth  who 
seem  to  think  that  there  is  no  possible  way  of  getting  along 
without  having  a great  big  army  or  a great  big  navy.  And  of 
all  the  stupidities  that  have  ever  been  enacted  in  the  world,  two 
of  the  most  stupid  are  the  dealings  with  the  South  Africans  and 
with  the  Filipinos.  (Applause.) 

Now,  those  of  us  who  have  attained  unto  the  Squirearchy, 


243 

those  of  us  who  are  now  titled  nobles  and  men  of  high  estate, 
have  attained  an  intelligence  that  leads  us  to  see  that  there  is 
some  other  way  out,  and  our  first  thought  is  that  before  we  go 
to  war  we  should  have  a reasonable  cause  for  it.  About  nine- 
tenths  of  the  causes  are  absolutely  puerile. 

Now,  a great  many  wars  have  been  entered  into  simply  to 
prove  who  is  the  best  man,  and  very  frequently  the  results  are 
the  same  as  in  the  case  of  an  Irishman,  invited  by  his  brother, 
who  had  risen  somewhat  in  life,  to  attend  this  brother’s  wedding. 
When  he  came  in  the  brother  said  to  him : “Mike,  go  up  to  the 
room  at  the  top  and  leave  your  coat” ; and  in  a few  minutes  the 
brother  came  out  and  found  Mike  down  at  the  foot  of  the 
stairway,  with  his  coat  torn  and  his  face  all  covered  with  gore ; 
and  he  said  to  him : “Why,  Mike,  what  in  the  devil  is  the 
matter  with  you?”  and  he  said:  “I  went  up  into  the  room  and 
I saw  a guy  there.  I said  to  him,  says  I,  ‘Who  bees  ye?’  and 
he  said  he  was  the  best  man, — and  he  was.”  (Great  laughter.) 
And  so  it  is  when  some  of  our  great  nations  take  hold  of  a 
little  Boer,  they  find  after  all  he  is  the  best  man.  (Applause.) 
It  is  a poor  reason  for  going  to  war  simply  to  assert  our  dignity 
and  to  let  the  world  know  that  we  are  not  afraid.  That  no 
longer  commends  itself  to  the  Squirearchy.  We  have  got  over 
that.  We  already  know  that  one  man  is  stronger  than  another. 
We  don’t  need  to  test  it.  (Laughter.) 

And  then  the  next  reason  for  going  to  war  is  that  you 
desire  to  take  possession  of  your  neighbor’s  territory.  The  good 
old  days  of  the  highwaymen  have  passed,  for  the  Squirearchy. 
We  no  longer  look  upon  the  highwayman  as  an  altogether  repu- 
table member  of  society ; and  why  we  should  look  upon  a high- 
wayman-nation any  more  favorably  than  we  do  upon  the 
individual  highwayman  I cannot  tell ; and  when  any  nation  arms 
itself  or  thinks  of  arming  itself  for  the  purpose  of  appropriating 
the  goods  of  its  neighbors,  then  there  should  be  some  kind 
of  a tribunal  that  would  bring  that  nation  to  terms  and 
hang  it  (great  applause) — or  they  should  hang  the  men  who 
lead  the  nation.  (Applause.)  And  if  the  crimes  of  the  rulers 
were  punished,  there  would  be  a considerable  amount  of  execu- 
tion going  on,  I fear.  But  a great  Providence  takes  care  of 
that,  and  every  nation  that  sins  against  the  law  of  justice, 
answers  to  the  God  of  Justice.  So  this  cause  for  going  to  war 


244 

is  one  that  the  Squirearchy  can  no  longer  approve  of,  but  we 
are  asked  in  this  day  to  go  to  war  for  the  purpose  of  “benevolent 
assimilation.”  (Laughter.)  We  want  to  civilize  these  people 
(laughter)  and  the  only  way  we  can  find  of  civilizing  them,  is 
by  shooting  them  through  the  heart.  (Applause  and  laughter.) 
Now  this  does  not  commend  itself  to  us  as  the  wisest  way  of 
assimilation.  If  we  want  to  conquer  those  men,  we  will  conquer 
them  by  other  means  than  these ; and  so  dismiss  all  these 
causes  for  war.  Then  we  will  ask  ourselves,  why  should  we  go 
to  war?  Why,  indeed,  if  not  because  the  knights  want  us  to. 
In  the  good  old  days  the  knight  did  his  own  fighting,  and  he 
bore  in  a great  measure  his  own  expense.  That  was  very  honor- 
able and  very  just,  but  now  the  knight  sits  at  home.  (Laughter 
and  applause.)  And  when  he  has  a war  quarrel  on  hand,  he 
says  to  us  squires,  to  us  common  people  (laughter)  : “We  have 
got  a fight  on  hand;  now  come  and  enlist,  and  I will  give  you 
thirteen  per  and  a bellyful  of  bullets/ * (Great  laughter  and 
applause.)  And  we  say,  “No,  thank  you.”  (Laughter.)  “We 
can  earn  more  money  staying  at  home,  and  we  prefer  to  retain 
our  inward  apparatus  for  better  uses.”  (Laughter.)  And  so 
we  decline  the  invitation. 

There  is  another  reason  why  we  decline  it.  It  is  a reason 
that  I do  not  like  to  speak  of  in  polite  society — but  it  is  against 
the  principles  of  our  religion.  (Great  laughter.)  When  I hear 
a clergyman  or  a newspaper  editor  egging  on  a fight,  I always 
have  in  mind  a man  at  a dog-fight.  He  says:  “Sick  him,  Towse; 
sick  him  Tige,”  and  when  Towse  and  Tige  get  together  at  each 
other’s  throat,  why  the  man  is  perfectly  safe,  because  he  cannot 
be  a dog.  (Great  laughter.)  And  so  our  clergymen  and  our 
editors  are  out  of  the  fight,  and  they  can  egg  it  on  as  much  as 
they  please.  (Laughter.)  But  I say,  it  is  against  the  principles 
of  our  religion.  Our  religion  teaches  us  that  this  other  fellow 
is  our  brother,  as  we  have  heard  to-night;  and  we  cannot  quite 
bring  ourselves  up  to  the  point  of  knocking  our  brother  on  the 
head ; it  rather  goes  against  us. 

And  then  we  are  told  that  we  all  have  one  Father,  and  we 
cannot  quite  make  it  seem  just  right  to  go  to  our  Father  and 
ask  him  to  help  us  whip  our  brother.  (Laughter.)  A Moham- 
medan in  London  said  to  the  English : “Why,  you  Christians 
are  strange  folk.  Here  you  Englishmen  are  praying  to  your 


245 

Christian  God  to  help  you  defeat  the  Boers,  and  the  Boers  are 
praying  to  the  same  Christian  God  to  help  them  defeat  the 
English.  Now,  let  me  ask  you  a question : ‘If  you  were  God, 
what  would  you  do?’  ” (Great  laughter.) 

Therefore,  as  it  is  against  the  principles  of  our  religion,  we 
must,  as  far  as  possible,  withdraw  from  all  this.  Yet,  as  I said, 
we  are  still  in  favor  of  warfare.  Why,  warfare  is  going  to 
continue  always ; warfare  is  going  to  continue  in  heaven. 
Warfare  is  the  rule,  but  there  is  always  a better  way.  We  have 
weapons  of  warfare  that  are  not  carnal ; weapons  that  are  mighty 
to  the  casting  down  of  strongholds. 

If  you  want  to  conquer  people,  what  are  you  going  to  do? 
Are  you  going  out  and  kill  just  as  many  as  possible,  and  make 
the  rest  of  them  your  bitter  haters?  No,  that  is  not  the  way  to 
do.  If  you  want  to  conquer  them,  just  go  without  any  army  at 
all,  just  as  I walk  down  here  among  men  who  have  bad  repu- 
tations in  New  York  (laughter)  and  simply  trust.  Show  that 
you  have  no  fear.  Give  yourself  to  the  people  that  you  want  to 
conquer;  show  them  that  you  have  nothing  in  your  heart  but 
love  for  them;  that  you  mean  to  be  just  in  all  your  dealings 
with  them;  and  that  if  any  question  arises  between  you  and 
them,  then  you  will  yield  that  question  at  once  for  the  sake  of 
maintaining  your  relation  of  good-will  and  affection  towards 
them. 

I have  heard  it  said  here  to-night,  I have  heard  it  said  upon 
every  platform  in  this  Peace  Congress,  that  it  is  quite  impos- 
sible for  any  nation  to  disarm  to-day — that  it  would  be  imme- 
diately over-run  by  all  the  rest  of  the  nations  of  the  world,  that 
it  would  be  wiped  out  of  existence.  Don’t  you  believe  it!  (Cries 
of  “no,  no,”  and  great  applause.)  No,  sir.  No,  sir.  That  is  an 
experiment  that  has  been  tried  twice  in  the  history  of  the  world, 
and  that  experiment  was  the  most  successful  of  all  the  world 
has  ever  seen.  (Cries  of  “good,”  and  applause.)  It  was  tried  for 
400  years  by  a great  body  in  the  heart  of  the  Roman  Empire. 
You  have  Christianity  here  to-day  because  Christianity  for  400 
years  did  that  very  thing,  stood  in  the  midst  of  its  foes,  unarmed. 
Whenever  any  man  was  called  to  die,  he  said : “Yes,  I will  die 
gladly  for  my  faith,”  but  never  once  through  that  400  years  did 
those  men,  although  they  were  one-third  of  the  population,  raise 
their  hand  in  self-defence.  And  what  was  the  result?  (Great 


246 

applause.)  They  brought  the  Roman  Empire  to  their  feet,  and 
they  exalted  their  standard  above  the  eagles  of  the  Empire. 
(Great  applause.)  Now  don’t  you  believe  that  any  nation  to-day, 
if  it  disarm  in  the  name  of  justice,  and  especially  if  it  were  a 
strong  nation,  would  be  over-run  by  the  world.  It  would  attract 
to  itself  the  whole  moral  force  of  the  world  at  that  instant ; it 
would  be  the  moral  leader  which  would  lay  the  way  open  for 
that  higher  civilization  for  which  we  are  all  pleading  to-night. 

And  there  was  another  experiment.  During  the  whole  of 
what  we  call  the  Middle  Ages,  Europe  was  just  one  seething 
mass  of  warfare.  Every  house  was  a castle ; every  highway  was 
a danger,  but  there  were  men  in  those  generations  whose  hearts 
were  for  Peace,  and  they  simply  went  and  withdrew  themselves 
and  built  themselves  little  shelters  in  the  woods.  They  never 
raised  hand  against  any  man ; they  left  the  postern  gates  of  their 
monasteries  open  to  anyone  who  would  come  in,  armed  or 
unarmed,  and  what  was  the  consequence?  The  wiping  out  of 
the  monasteries  ? Not  a bit ; the  monasteries  rose  up  and  ruled 
the  whole  world.  And  yet  we  are  told  again  and  again  by  the 
wisest  that  we  cannot  disarm. 

Suppose  you  were  to  see  me  here  with  a belt  around  me. 
(Great  laughter.)  What  kind  of  a man  would  you  take  me  to 
be?  I am  not  afraid  to  go  down  into  any  street  in  the  city 
to-night  or  any  other  night,  just  as  I am.  There  is  a chance 
that  somebody  may  kill  me,  but  it  is  a bare  chance,  and  it  is  so 
remote  that  I will  take  the  chance  every  time.  Now,  we  indi- 
viduals have  already  disarmed  and  none  of  us  have  suffered  any 
evil  consequence,  and  no  evil  consequence  would  come  at  all  if 
the  nations  were  to  disarm.  Not  the  slightest.  We  simply 
would  all  cease  to  be  swashbucklers,  and  we  would  become 
civilized  gentle  folk,  and  we  would  take  all  the  governors  and 
the  rulers,  and  the  kings  and  the  presidents,  and  we  would  make 
them  squires,  as  Mr.  Gompers  is.  (Great  applause  and  laughter.) 

Now  my  dear  friends,  that  is  my  message  to  you  to-night, 
and  of  course  no  one  will  heed  it,  but  the  day  is  at  hand  when 
it  must  be  heeded,  because  all  the  Christian  nations  are  on  the 
point  of  bankruptcy.  When  I was  in  the  Duchy  of  Baden  some 
years  ago,  I saw  there  a sight  which  impressed  me  very  deeply. 
One  morning  I heard  the  sound  of  military  music.  I looked  out 
of  the  window  and  saw  regiment  after  regiment  passing  by.  I 


247 

asked  what  was  the  occasion  of  their  passing,  and  I was  told  that 
the  forces  of  the  Duchy  were  going  down  to  Wurtemburg  to 
engage  in  war  manoeuvres  there.  Then  I was  out  on  the  bank 
of  Lake  Constance,  and  I saw  there  a woman  and  a cow 
harnessed  to  a plow.  Thousands  of  men  were  carried  away 
down  yonder  to  learn  the  art  of  war,  and  the  women  were 
compelled  to  labor,  that  these  might  have  their  martial  trappings. 
And  that  is  what  war  is.  And  you  and  I,  gentlemen  and  ladies, 
have  laid  upon  us  the  task  of  preaching  the  Gospel  of  Peace. 
(Great  applause.) 

Mr.  Buchanan  : 

The  next  speaker  needs  no  special  introduction  to  an  audi- 
ence acquainted  at  all  with  the  American  labor  movement.  It 
is  a pleasure  to-night  particularly  to  present  him  because  of  the 
fact  that  so  many — two  or  three  at  least  of  his  associates — whom 
we  expected  to  be  here,  were  detained  elsewhere.  Mr.  Samuel 
Gompers,  President  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor. 
(Applause.) 

Humanity’s  Growth  Towards  Peace 

Samuel  Gompers 

Mr.  Chairman,  Fellow  Unionists  and  Friends:  I am 
greatly  gratified  that  circumstances  should  so  have  shaped  them- 
selves as  to  permit  me  to  attend  this  meeting  this  evening,  much 
as  I really  believed  it  would  have  been  almost  impossible  to  be 
here. 

I want  to  be  here  to-night  because  I want  to  mingle  my 
voice  with  the  voices  of  men  and  women  of  labor  of  New  York 
in  protest  against  the  horrors  of  war  and  in  favor  of  the  demand 
for  Universal  Peace. 

We  men  and  women  of  labor  have  had  large  experience  in 
the  great  movement  of  the  toiling  masses  to  secure  some  degree 
of  recognition  of  the  rights  which  have  been  too  long  denied  us. 
The  wrongs  which  we  have  had  to  bear  for  so  long  a period, 
the  voices  of  the  masses  of  labor  for  centuries,  cry  out  in  protest 
against  the  burdens  that  have  been  borne,  and  yearnings,  unex- 
pressed and  often  inarticulate,  arise  for  the  day  when  justice 
shall  reign  among  men.  (Applause.) 


248 

We  have  had  to  fight  as  well  as  to  argue  for  our  rights, 
not  that  we  loved  the  pursuit  of  conquest,  not  that  we  loved  or 
had  any  heart  in  contest,  but  simply  that  we  were  permeated 
with  the  conviction  that  justice  to  labor  would  not  and  could  not 
be  secured  until  those  who  stood  in  the  path  of  progress  and 
success  had  manifested  their  design ; that  nothing  would  be 
gained  for  labor  until  the  myriads  of  laborers  of  our  country 
should  determine  and  demonstrate  to  their  opponents  that  though 
they  loved  Peace,  they  were  not  averse  to  bearing  the  burdens 
of  war  in  order  to  establish  justice  and  right.  (Applause.) 

It  is  perhaps  only  those  who  have  borne  the  brunt  of  battle 
and  can  bear  testimony  of  contest  by  their  scars  that  realize  its 
tremendous  importance  and  responsibilities.  It  was  not  a mere 
expression  which  one  of  the  greatest  generals  the  civil  war  in 
our  country  produced  used  when  he  declared  at  the  end  of  that 
great  contest,  “War  is  hell.” 

No  man  and  no  woman  who  is  engaged  in  industrial  conflict 
will  designate  it  by  a more  euphonious  term,  but  when  in  the 
course  of  human  events,  rights  are  denied  to  the  toiling  masses 
of  our  country,  as  the  inalienable  rights  were  denied  to  our 
forefathers  in  the  Colonies  of  America,  then  the  time  comes 
when  men  and  women  must  assert  themselves  in  order  to  main- 
tain their  integrity,  their  manhood  and  their  womanhood. 
(Applause.) 

He  who  has  gone  through  the  great  struggles,  national, 
international,  industrial ; he  who  has  borne  some  of  the  brunt  of 
battle,  will  endeavor  to  find  the  means  to  maintain  integrity  and 
honor  and  promote  interests  without  unnecessary  contest.  I am 
firmly  persuaded  that  at  least  within  a period  of  a quarter  of  a 
century,  there  has  not  occurred  a war  justified  by  necessity  or  by 
circumstances  of  human  liberty  and  human  rights.  (Applause.) 
The  old  time  land'  lust  of  Kings  and  Emperors  must  give  way 
to  the  conscience  and  the  justice  and  the  right  of  homestead  and 
manhood  and  independence  and  intelligence  and  humanity. 
(Applause.)  Nor  will  we,  as  workers,  longer  consent  to  be 
utilized  as  the  fighting  forces,  to  be  murdered  and  mowed  down 
in  order  to  conquer  the  markets  of  barbarians  or  savages. 
(Applause.) 

I heard  with  a great  deal  of  pleasure  to-night  the  reading 
of  the  preamble  and  resolutions  adopted  at  the  Convention  of 


249 

the  American  Federation  of  Labor  held  at  Minneapolis  last 
November,  but  I should  be  thoroughly  ashamed  of  myself,  as  a 
member  of  organized  labor,  if  I believed  that  it  was  left  to  the 
closing  days  of  the  year  1906  for  organized  labor  to  demonstrate 
its  position  upon  this  great  question.  I know  of  no  instance 
within  the  past  half  century  where  the  working  people  of  our 
country,  aye  the  working  people  of  all  civilized  countries, 
have  met  that  they  did  not  declare  unequivocally  their  position 
for  International  Peace  and  Brotherhood.  (Applause.)  Aye,  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor  in  1886,  in  its  convention  at 
Baltimore,  met  the  Union  stonecutter,  the  Member  of  Parliament, 
William  Randal  Cremer,  who  was  the  first  pioneer  for  Interna- 
tional Arbitration.  That  convention  resolved,  by  unanimous  vote, 
to  place  the  labor  movement  of  America  in  favor  of  the  abolition 
of  war  and  for  the  establishment  of  Universal  Peace.  (Applause.) 
I say  this,  my  friends,  because  of  the  fact  that  to-day  we  see  a 
reversal  of  the  situation  which  obtained  so  largely  among  the 
people  of  our  country  a few  short  years  ago.  All  that  was 
necessary  then  was  for  some  politician,  declaring  himself  a 
statesman  and  proclaiming  that  he  was  the  embodiment  of  all 
that  was  patriotic,  to  carry  some  fanciful  chip  upon  his  political 
shoulder  and  challenge  the  world  to  take  it  off,  and  men, 
at  the  behest  of  political  charlatans  and  industrial  greedy  gour- 
mands, would  fly  at  each  other’s  throats  in  the  name  of  patriotism 
and  nationality;  and  the  wave  of  enthusiasm  that  seemed  to 
arise  swept  into  the  background  any  thought  of  a humanitarian 
character. 

A great  change  has  come  over  the  minds  of  the  working 
people  of  the  world,  and  none  the  less  of  the  American  working 
men;  due  not  to  preachments,  due  not  to  those  who,  from  the 
upper  strata,  wished  the  workingmen  well,  but  due  to  the  organi- 
zation and  the  increased  intelligence  resulting  from  the  reduction 
in  the  hours  of  labor  secured  by  the  organizations  of  labor. 
(Great  applause.) 

The  opportunity  for  leisure  and  rest  and  the  opportunity 
for  the  cultivation  of  the  best  that  is  in  us,  has  made  way  for  a 
new  wave,  not  the  wave  of  bigotry,  of  hatred,  but  the  wave  of 
universal  love  and  affection  and  brotherhood,  and  the  recognition 
of  the  principle  that  after  all  the  man,  because  he  happens  to  be 
born  in  Germany  or  France  or  England  or  Ireland  or  Scotland 


2 50 

or  Italy  or  Hungary  or  Poland  or  Russia,  is  no  less  a man  than 
the  American  citizen  with  all  the  claims  of  patriotism  and 
humanity  bestowed  upon  him.  (Great  applause.) 

To-day  we  find  a peculiar  and  encouraging  condition  of 
affairs.  The  wave  of  bigotry  and  hatred  has  receded  and  made 
way  for  the  most  beautiful,  the  most  gratifying  wave  of 
enthusiasm  for  Peace.  It  is  a strange  spectacle  but  nevertheless 
gratifying.  Usually  those  who  love  Peace,  those  who  sought 
success  and  happiness  by  peaceful  methods,  were  decried.  It  is 
strange  indeed,  it  is  wonderful,  it  is  an  awakening,  a new  era, 
when  there  can  be,  as  we  find  to-day,  world-wide  enthusiasm  for 
Peace.  (Applause.)  For  centuries  men  have  decried  the  white 
flag.  The  white  flag  was  always  coupled  with  the  idea  of  weak- 
ness, of  cowardice.  To-day,  thank  God,  the  development  has 
come  in  the  human  conscience  and  mind  and  the  white  flag  is  no 
longer  regarded  as  an  accompaniment  or  an  expression  of  the 
yellow  streak.  It  requires  some  courage  for  men  to  assert  Peace 
rather  than  war.  (Applause.) 

We  have  noted  upon  the  battlefield  men  who,  no  doubt,  have 
been  heroic  in  their  self-sacrifice,  and  under  the  stress  of 
enthusiasm  and  excitement  have  manifested  the  largest  element 
of  human  bravery.  But,  my  friends,  that  element  of  warfare  is 
about  at  an  end,  by  reason  of  the  wonderful  effectiveness  of 
modern  armaments.  Now,  frequently  men  who  are  contending, 
army  against  army,  do  not  see  each  other  and  do  not  know  the 
whereabouts  of  the  enemy.  Modern  warfare  is  robbed  of  the 
glory — yes,  if  that  might  be  termed  glory — modern  warfare  is 
robbed  of  the  glory  of  hand-to-hand  contest,  it  is  now  a cold 
calculation  of  mathematics  written  down  in  cold  blood,  and  when 
followed,  causes  each  man  to  be  his  fellow’s  murderer,  and 
nothing  less.  (Applause.) 

To-day  we  urge  that  it  requires  more  heroism  in  men  and 
women  to  bear  the  brunt  of  great  sacrifice,  of  quiet,  silent 
suffering  for  the  betterment  of  the  human  family,  than  is  mani- 
fested upon  the  gory  field  of  battle.  (Applause.)  To  endeavor 
to  help,  to  uplift,  to  benefit  our  fellows,  to  make  the  burdens  of 
life  less  onerous  and  to  help  bear  our  brother’s  burdens,  to  make 
life  brighter  and  better,  to  permit  the  ray  of  sunshine  to  enter 
into  the  home  and  to  dispel  the  gloom  of  the  fireside,  to  make 
man  brighter  and  nobler  and  woman  more  efficient  and  beautiful 


251 

in  this  great  uplifting  work,  and  childhood  more  expectant  of  a 
brighter  and  better  day,  is  the  work  of  this  century  which  you, 
the  toilers,  and  the  intelligent  and  sympathetic  men  and  women, 
are  effecting  with  a heroism  and  splendid  effort  that  may  not  be 
understood  or  appreciated  in  our  time.  But  as  we  sing  the 
glories  of  the  men  who  have  won  for  us  the  great  attributes 
and  opportunities  of  freedom  in  our  time,  so  those  who  follow 
us  will  realize  that  in  our  day,  in  the  same  measure  that  we 
perform  our  duties  to  our  fellows,  we  will  have  performed  the 
same  great  work  for  the  social  uplift  and  Universal  Peace. 

May  I say  just  this  one  word?  Like  my  friend  who  has 
preceded  me,  I did  not  expect  to  address  this  meeting;  in  fact, 
when  I was  asked  to  be  present,  I did  not  believe  that  it  would 
be  possible  for  me  to  be  here,  but  our  honored  Chairman  and 
the  presiding  genius  of  the  People’s  Institute,  Mr.  Smith 
(applause),  asked  me  a few  minutes  ago  when  I entered  the 
hall  whether  I would  not  say  a word  to  this  meeting  upon 
this  all-pervading  subject — and  I said  that  I would.  Let  me 
just  add  one  word  that  presses  upon  my  mind  for  expression. 
It  is  this : You  cannot  hope  to  secure  International  Peace  by 
the  disarmament  of  any  one  of  the  peoples  of  the  world.  I 
doubt  if  there  is  a single  thinking  American  who  would 
advocate,  in  present  conditions,  that  the  American  people  and 
the  American  Government  should  decide  upon  the  policy  of 
disarmament.  Can’t  do  it,  my  friends.  To  disarm  to-day 
when  the  world  is  an  armed  camp  outside,  would  mean  for 
that  country  to  be  wiped  off  the  face  of  the  map.  (Applause.^ 
We  can’t  do  that,  and  I shall  not  even  discuss  general  disarma- 
ment. It  is  not  a question  for  discussion  just  now,  but  let 
me  say  this:  We  hope,  by  the  great  pressure  of  the  public 
conscience  of  the  American  people,  so  to  impress  it  upon  the 
Government  of  the  United  States  that  it  in  turn  will  give  most 
explicit  instructions  to  the  representatives  of  the  next  Hague 
Conference  that,  if  they  cannot  agree  upon  general  or  gradual 
disarmament,  at  least  that  this  constant  burden  of  expansion 
and  growth  of  armaments  shall  be  arrested  for  all  time  to 
come.  (Applause.)  When  men  are  engaged  in  running  in  a 
given  direction,  it  is  the  most  difficult  task  to  expect  them  at  one 
fell  swoop  to  turn  around  and  run  back.  If  we  can  stop  them 
running,  the  chances  are  that  the  new  conscience  aroused  will 


252 

turn  their  attention  in  the  other  direction,  and  then  they  may 
retrace  their  steps.  (Applause.) 

The  resolutions  that  have  been  presented  and  adopted  at 
this  meeting  to-night,  endorsing  and  ratifying  the  position  taken 
by  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  are  a most  gratifying 
sign.  If  you  contemplate  the  causes  for  and  the  causes  which 
lead  to  war,  if  you  contemplate  the  results  of  grab  and  graft 
that  are  expected  to  result  from  war,  the  chances  are  that  you 
will  help  to  abolish  war.  (Applause.)  The  working  men  have 
to  a considerable  extent  established,  by  their  trade  agreements  in 
their  organized  labor  movement,  the  principle  of  Peace,  for  these 
are  nothing  more  than  industrial  treaties,  industrial  treaties  of 
Peace.  I grant  you  that  in  our  comparatively  unorganized  condi- 
tion we  are  not  always  capable  of  defending  our  position,  but 
we  have  enunciated  it  as  a principle,  and  no  principle  founded 
on  truth  or  justice  or  right  has  ever  been  promulgated  and 
contested  for  but  what  it  has  been  finally  crowned  with  victory. 
(Applause.)  What  we  aim  to  accomplish  by  our  meeting 
to-night  here  and  the  meetings  elsewhere  is  to  reach  the  judg- 
ment and  the  conscience  of  our  people.  We  have  no  ulterior 
purpose  to  serve.  We  have  no  profit  to  gain ; we  have  no  human 
sacrifice  that  we  ask  upon  the  altar  of  our  cause.  There  is 
nothing  in  all  the  demands  which  we  make  upon  modern  society 
that  is  not  founded  upon  the  best  and  the  highest  conception  of 
human  aspirations  for  love,  for  right,  for  justice,  for  humanity; 
and  in  that  great  cause,  all  of  us  may  enlist  in  the  hope  that 
final  and  ultimate  justice  and  righteousness  and  Peace  shall 
prevail  the  world  over,  and  recognize  and  establish  for  all  time 
to  come  the  universal  brotherhood  of  man.  (Great  applause.) 

Mr.  Buchanan  : 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : The  next  and  last  speaker  of 
this  evening  will  be  one  who  brings  the  message  of  Peace  from 
a foreign  land.  Our  speakers  so  far  this  evening  have  all  been 
from  our  own  country.  The  next  speaker  is  a gentleman  who 
has  been  identified  with  the  International  Peace  Movement  since 
its  inception.  I refer  to  Mr.  William  T.  Stead,  the  editor  of 
the  London  Review  of  Reviews.  (Great  applause.) 

I have  been  requested  to  announce  that  Mr.  Stead  will  speak 


253 

from  this  platform  on  Friday  evening  under  the  auspices  of  the 
People’s  Institute,  I believe. 

Mr.  Smith  : Yes. 

Mr.  Buchanan  : On  what  topic  ? 

Mr.  Smith  : Mr.  Stead  will  tell. 

Mr.  Stead  : Mr.  Chairman 

A Voice  : You’re  all  right,  William ! 

Mr.  Stead: 

I am  all  right.  There  is  nothing  the  matter  with  me. 
(Great  applause.)  But  you  are  not  all  right.  (Renewed 
applause  and  laughter.)  I must  speak  plain  to  you.  I don’t 
think  you  are  a satisfactory  audience  at  all.  (Great  applause 
and  laughter.)  I am  ashamed  of  you.  (Renewed  laughter.) 
And  I tell  you  why  I am  ashamed  of  you,  because  you  seem 
to  be  perfectly  ready  to  agree  to  absolutely  contradictory  doctrines 
from  the  speakers  on  this  platform.  When  I came  in,  I heard 
Mr.  Gompers  declaring  that  disarmament  was  absolutely  impos- 
sible, and  criminal,  unless  we  all  disarmed  together,  and  you 
cheered  that.  Then  I heard  Mr.  Crapsey  saying,  That  is  not  right, 
and  you  cheered  that.  (Renewed  applause  and  laughter.)  Now 
I do  not  think  that  is  sensible.  (Applause.)  And  you  cheered 
that.  (Renewed  applause  and  laughter.) 

Now  I think  there  cannot  be  a greater  mistake  than  to  be 
too  peaceful.  It  is  because  the  peaceful  people  are  so  horribly 
peaceful  that  the  warlike  people  get  it  all  their  own  way.  You 
remember  that  Archbishop  Paley  one  time  was  told  by  a clergy- 
man as  follows : “My  wife  and  I have  been  married  for 
twenty-five  years  and  we  have  never  had  a row.”  And  Arch- 
bishop Paley  said  to  him : “My  dear  sir,  what  an  awfully  dull 
life  you  must  have  had!”  (Great  laughter.) 

I tell  you  another  reason  why  I don’t  like  you.  (Great 
laughter.)  At  all  the  peace  meetings  I have  been  at  since  I came 
to  New  York  there  was  no  kick  back  from  any  of  you.  Now 
what  I feel  is  that  when  you  get  close  to  a man,  he  ought  in 
some  way  or  another  to  indicate  that  he  does  not  agree  with  you. 
Now,  you  don’t  ever  say  anything  in  America  no  matter  what 
the  speaker  says.  He  may  talk  the  greatest  tommyrot  in  the 


254 

world  (laughter),  and  you  are  all  so  polite  you  let  him  go  on 
talking.  (Laughter.)  Now  what  you  want  to  do  in  this  world, 
when  a fellow  makes  a fool  of  himself,  is  to  tell  him  so;  and  if 
you  find  that  I am  making  a fool  of  myself,  why  for  God’s  sake 
tell  me  so  and  quick.  (Applause  and  laughter.) 

Now,  I want  you  to  understand,  after  having  made  these 
preliminary  complimentary  observations  (laughter),  which  I hope 
will  have  the  desired  effect  of  inducing  you  to  express  your 
dissent  with  appropriate  .emphasis  when  you  differ  from  me,  I 
want  to  say  one  or  two  words  to  you,  as  representatives  of 
American  labor. 

I bring  to  you  a message  from  Mr.  W.  R.  Cremer,  one  of 
the  oldest  workingmen  members  in  Parliament.  (Applause.)  He 
has  often  been  to  America.  He  was  the  man  who  first  origin- 
ated the  idea  of  the  Interparliamentary  Union,  and  he  received 
the  Nobel  prize  and  immediately  gave  it  away  for  the  purpose  of 
promoting  peace  and  arbitration,  although  he  was  only  a working 
man.  (Applause.)  He  desires  me  to  say  to  you  that  he  sends 
a message  of  heartfelt  sympathy,  and  regrets  very  much  that  he 
cannot  be  here  to  speak  to  you  himself.  He  would  have  been 
very  glad  to  have  been  here,  but  Parliament  is  in  session  and  he 
is  an  old  man,  going  on  eighty,  but  in  heart  and  soul  he  is  with 
you  to-day.  So  much  for  the  message  with  which  I am  charged. 

Now,  I want  to  say  a few  practical  things.  We  have  heard 
a great  deal  this  evening  of  ideas  that  deal  with  war  in  the 
abstract,  and  peace  in  the  abstract,  and  various  other  things. 
That  part  of  the  subject  has  been  so  very  well  and  fully  dealt 
with,  you  will  perhaps  pardon  me  if  I venture  to  say  one  or  two 
practical  things. 

We  in  England  look  to  you  in  America  to  redeem  your 
character  and  reputation,  which  have  been  very  much  battered  of 
late  years.  (Laughter  and  applause.)  There  was  a time,  when 
I was  a boy,  when  we  looked  to  the  great  Republic  of  the  West 
as  the  home  of  freedom,  as  the  place  where  every  working  man 
had  a fair  chance  to  get  to  the  top,  where  there  were  no  great 
fortunes,  where  there  were  no  peers,  where  there  was  no  estab- 
lished Church — a land  which  was  the  home  of  liberty,  the  home 
of  opportunity,  the  place  for  the  laboring  men  of  the  world. 
Well,  of  late  years  that  is  not  the  kind  of  idea  we  have  had  of 
America.  We  may  be  mistaken,  but  what  we  have  in  our 


255 

country  as  the  idea  of  America  is  that  you  have  developed 
bigger  fortunes  than  anybody  else  in  the  world;  and  judging 
from  the  speeches  which  I have  heard  from  the  lips  of  Mr. 
Carnegie,  there  is  no  greater  misfortune  that  can  befall  any  man 
than  to  be  a millionaire.  (Laughter.)  And  the  growth  of  these 
enormous  fortunes  has  made  it  very  difficult  for  the  small  man 
to  get  to  the  top.  The  equality  of  opportunity  which  we  used  to 
think  belonged  to  you,  seems  to  have  dwindled  away;  and  in 
place  of  the  passionate  enthusiasm  for  liberty  and  freedom  which 
we  used  to  identify  with  your  people,  your  sympathy  for  liberty 
and  freedom  throughout  the  world,  we  hear  a great  deal  about 
graft — curious  word  that!  (Laughter.)  A word  which  I will 
not  attempt  to  translate  into  my  ordinary  English,  for  fear  I 
might  make  a mistake.  (Laughter.) 

We  hear  a great  deal  concerning  the  extraordinary  methods 
of  getting  rich,  what  may  be  called,  I suppose,  legalized  highway 
robbery.  (Great  laughter  and  applause.)  In  short,  the  fine  old 
American  ideal,  in  which  I was  brought  up  when  I was  a boy, 
has  been  very  largely  overclouded  and  eclipsed  by  things  which 
I do  not  think  you  like  any  better  than  we  do,  but  still  there  is 
in  the  American  heart  and  in  the  American  brain  a great  belief 
in  the  common  man,  the  ordinary  man,  the  ordinary  woman. 

There  is  one  thing,  almost  the  only  thing  that  I find  in  your 
country  in  which  you  preserve  somewhat  the  old  idea  of  democ- 
racy; and  that  is  this,  that  your  waiter  and  your  shoeblack,  and 
your  barber  and  your  chambermaid  all  shake  hands  with  you  and 
talk  to  you  as  if  you  were  all  Dukes  and  Counts  and  Countesses 
together.  (Laughter.)  That  is  very  pleasant  to  me,  for  it  is  a 
very  fine  lingering  relic  of  the  traditions  of  the  good  old  time. 
But  I must  say  that  when  many  Americans  come  over  to  our 
country,  they  drop  that  good  tradition  very  precious  short  and 
are  much  more  exclusive  than  the  English  aristocracy  itself. 
(Laughter  and  applause.) 

What  we  want  to  do  and  what  I am  over  here  largely 
to  ask  you  to  do,  is  to  ascertain  whether  it  is  possible  for  the 
American  enthusiasm,  the  distinctly  American  democratic 
enthusiasm  that  believes  in  equality  of  opportunity,  that  believes 
in  democratic  government,  that  is  not  run  entirely  by  bosses  and 
governed  by  graft,  which  believes  that  all  men  are  equal  and 


2 56 

that  all  men  should  have  a fair  chance,  and  that  differences, 
instead  of  being  settled  by  the  methods  of  the  battlefield  should 
be  referred  to  courts — whether  it  is  possible  for  that  element  to 
be  brought  into  activity  again.  We  want  to  revive  the  old 
American  ideals  before  the  peoples  of  Europe. 

I can  assure  you,  speaking  from  very  wide  experience  in 
European  nations,  that  the  general  opinion  of  Europe  is  that  the 
American  is  a dreadfully  smart  man  who  has  got  a great  deal 
of  money,  a man  who  is  very  unscrupulous  as  to  the  way  in 
which  he  makes  this  money  and  very  lavish  in  the  way  in  which 
he  spends  it,  and  that  his  great  object  is  to  have  a good  time\ 
That  is  the  American  in  England,  the  American  in  Europe,  the 
pleasure-seeking  American,  the  American  who  has  money  to 
burn,  who  goes  to  Monte  Carlo  and  Paris  and  all  that — and  that 
is  the  last  man  in  the  world  to  whom  you  should  look  for  any 
ideal  or  any  great  enthusiasm. 

I believe  there  is  still  enthusiasm,  there  is  still  faith  in 
humanity  on  the  part  of  the  American  people,  and  I want  to  get 
it  manifested.  I want  it  brought  home  to  the  people  in  Europe. 

Now,  there  is  one  particular  proposal  with  which  I have  been 
identified  in  England  and  which  I wish  to  recommend  to  you  as 
a sample  of  what  we  want  to  get  done  at  the  Hague  Conference, 
and  1 want  you  to  help  to  get  it  done.  You  know  at  the  present 
moment  that  Monarchies — which  you  all  despise,  of  course,  I 
presume — as  free-born  Republicans — Monarchies  have  at  least 
more  common  sense  than  Republics  in  one  thing,  and  that  is  that 
Monarchies  recognize  the  Monarchs.  They  recognize  that 
because  they  are  governing  countries  side  by  side  with  each 
other,  it  is  very  important  they  should  be  on  neighborly  terms; 
that  they  should  not  quarrel  more  than  is  absolutely  necessary ; 
that  they  should  be  a little  chummy  among  themselves,  visit  each 
other,  dine  with  each  other,  correspond  with  each  other,  and  in 
short  show  hospitality  to  each  other.  Now,  Democracies  have 
never  learned  that  fundamental  lesson.  We  have  democratized 
many  things  in  the  Old  World  and  you  have  been  a Democracy 
from  the  first,  but  you  have  never  democratized  hospitality ; 
neither  have  we,  but  we  hope  to  begin. 

We  have  heard  a great  deal  concerning  the  various  Squires 
upon  this  platform  to-night.  (Laughter.)  We  in  England 
always  consider  when  a man  sticks  “Esquire”  after  his  name,  it 


257 

is  a kind  of  intimation — unless  the  man  is  legally  entitled  to  the 
word  Esquire — that  it  is  the  mark  of  a snob.  Plain  “Mr.”  is 
all  right.  Now  you  have  crowned  a lot  of  spurious  Esquires ; 
you  will  be  getting  some  Knights,  Dukes,  Counts  and  Princes 
before  long.  But  you  have  in  your  Labor  Unions  men  who 
correspond  to  the  old  Dukes  and  Feudal  Princes  of  old  times. 
They  are  not  hereditary  leaders,  but  they  are  leaders. 
(Applause.)  And  they  have  got  thousands  and  hundreds  of 
thousands  of  men  at  their  backs.  But  where  is  there  a govern- 
ment in  the  world  that  will  recognize  Mr.  Gompers  as  a Prince? 
Yet  he  is  far  more  important  than  many  of  the  tuppeny  ha’penny 
Princes  we  have.  (Applause.)  We  maintain  that  if  we  are 
going  to  inaugurate  an  era  of  democracy  based  on  fellowship 
and  Peace  among  the  nations,  we  must  practice  hospitality  to  the 
leaders  of  democracy  and  especially  to  the  leaders  of  organized 
labor. 

You  say,  how  can  you  do  that?  Very  simply,  my  friends, 
if  you've  got  two  things : First,  common  sense  and  good-will ; 
secondly,  the  money  with  which  to  do  it.  It  is  precisely  to  that 
question  of  money  that  I am  coming  now.  Do  you  think  it  is 
reasonable  that  a government  should  try  to  maintain  Peace  only 
by  preparing  for  war,  instead  of  endeavoring  to  work  for  Peace 
by  promoting  peaceful  sentiments  among  its  people?  We  in 
England  have  studied  this  matter  carefully,  and  we  have  come 
to  the  conclusion  practically,  that  the  time  has  arrived  when  every 
government  in  the  civilized  world  should  make  an  appropriation 
every  year  for  the  purpose  of  showing  hospitality  to  other 
nations,  and  for  the  purpose  of  promoting  Peace  and  good-will 
among  its  own  people.  And  by  way  of  beginning,  it  has  been 
proposed  that  we  should  ask  the  governments  of  the  civilized 
world  at  the  Hague  Conference  to  set  aside,  say,  one  red  cent 
for  Peace  and  hospitality  for  every  ten  dollars  that  they  spend 
upon  powder  and  shot.  (Applause.)  One  red  cent — decimal 
one  per  cent,  of  the  army  and  navy  appropriations — to  be  spent  in 
promoting  good  feeling  among  the  peoples  by  an  interchange  of 
hospitality. 

Do  you  know  how  much  that  would  mean  in  our  country? 
It  would  mean  that  we  should  have  about  three  hundred  thou- 
sand dollars  a year  to  spend  in  promoting  Peace  by  promoting 
good  feeling,  good  neighborliness,  showing  hospitality  to  the 


17 


258 

representatives  of  the  people,  whether  they  be  Trade  Union 
leaders,  Members  of  Congress,  distinguished  artists,  men  of 
science,  any  person  who  serves  his  country.  These  people  ought 
to  be  received,  ought  to  be  welcomed,  ought  to  be  entertained. 
Now  we  want  your  support  in  your  country  to  the  proposition 
that  instead  of  spending  all  your  money  to  preserve  Peace  by 
making  preparation  for  war,  you  should  spend  one  dollar  in 
every  thousand  upon  the  more  practical  methods  of  promoting 
brotherly  love  and  kindly  feelings  among  the  peoples. 
(Applause.) 

We  want  to  get  you  to  be  really  aroused  on  this  ques- 
tion— which  I am  very  sure  of,  because  when  a man  gets 
really  aroused,  there  is  always  more  fight  in  him  than  there 
seems  to  be  in  the  kind  of  meetings  I have  addressed.  You  know 
in  war  one  of  the  things  you  have  to  do  is  to  get  in  touch  with 
your  enemy  by  making  a reconnoissance  in  force.  By  that 
means  you  feel  out  your  enemy  and  know  where  to  plant  your 
shot  in  the  midst  of  him.  We  have  been  making  a great  many 
reconnoissances  in  force,  but  I do  not  think  we  have  drawn 
anybody’s  fire  anywhere  upon  our  movement  except  one  miser- 
able tupenny  ha’penny  person  who  seemed  to  think  it  was  much 
better  to  use  the  soldiers  against  his  own  country  than  against  a 
foreign  foe.  (Cries  of  hear,  hear.)  I am  glad  that  one  person 
approves  energetically,  but  will  nobody  disapprove  as  ener- 
getically ? 

Now,  if  you  are  really  going  to  work  this  business,  you  have 
got  to  set  to  work  practically.  How  can  you  bring  your  feeling, 
your  opinion,  your  convictions  to  bear  upon  the  government? 
Only  in  one  way,  my  friends.  You  must  band  yourselves 
together  and  make  yourselves  an  intolerable  nuisance  to  everyone 
who  does  not  do  what  you  want.  (Laughter.)  There  is  but  one 
way  of  getting  anything  from  any  government  and  that  is  by 
making  it  uncomfortable  for  them  not  to  go  your  way. 
(Laughter  and  applause.)  Then  make  it  more  uncomfortable 
for  them  to  go  other  peoples’  way  than  yours.  All  the  people 
who  make  money  out  of  war,  and  supply  war  material,  have  an 
enormous  mass  of  family  interests  in  the  army,  in  the  navy,  in 
those  who  are  building  ships — the  bread  and  butter  of  these 
people  depend  on  army  expenditures,  on  navy  expenditures, 
going  on  and  going  on ; and  if  you  do  not  band  yourselves 


259 

together  and  make  it  very  hot  for  people  who  do  not  do  what 
you  want,  the  organized  interests  which  represent  the  expendi- 
tures will  down  you  every  time. 

Now,  there  has  been  a great  deal  said  about  organized  labor 
banding  together.  I am  very  glad  that  I can  bear  witness 
to-night  that  in  England  organized  labor  has  stood  the  test  and 
stood  it  very  well  on  the  subject  of  Peace  and  war.  It  is  all 
very  well  to  throw  our  caps  up  into  the  air  when  there  is  no 
wrar  thunder  heard,  no  madness  in  the  population,  but  when  we 
are  in  a war,  where  our  own  countrymen  are  fighting  against  a 
foreign  foe,  it  takes  a good  deal  of  grit,  a good  deal  of  earnest- 
ness to  stand  up  against  your  own  government  and  denounce  it, 
and  expose  yourself  to  the  accusation  of  denouncing  your  own 
countrymen  who  are  dying  on  the  field  of  battle  for  the  honor 
of  your  flag.  (Great  applause.)  But  all  labor  men — we  did  not 
have  very  many  in  Parliament  then — were,  with  one  solitary 
exception,  I believe,  absolutely  as  a unit  against  that  abominable 
South  African  war.  They  stood  as  a rock  and  they  had  their 
reward.  They  went  back  to  their  constituencies,  some  twenty 
or  thirty,  and  they  came  back  nearly  a hundred  strong — a hun- 
dred labor  members  there  are  at  present  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons— and  Peace  men  every  one  of  them.  That  is  a good  record. 
(Applause.) 

But  what  we  want  you  to  do,  the  organized  labor  men  of 
this  country,  is  to  back  up  the  organized  labor  of  European 
countries.  We  have  a far  greater  burden  of  armaments  than 
you  have.  The  war  pressure  is  far  more  keenly  felt  by  us  than 
it  is  by  you.  You  are  a great,  free  and  practically  unlooted 
country;  your  great  treasures  are  unappropriated.  You  have 
only  scratched  the  surface  of  the  treasure  house  of  the  world  in 
which  you  live.  We  are  living  in  an  old  world.  We  want  a 
fresh  breath  of  the  American  enthusiasm  to  encourage  us  to 
keep  on  fighting.  And  so  it  is  that  I propose,  and  I hope  on 
Friday  night,  when  I am  here  to  discuss  more  at  length  with 
you  and  in  a more  informal  fashion  than  I am  doing  now,  the 
proposal  that  representative  Americans  of  international  reputa- 
tion— including  a fair  proportion  of  the  representatives  of 
organized  labor,  men  whom  I will  venture  to  name  in  the  provi- 
sional list  which  I submit,  including  Mr.  Gompers,  Mr.  Mitchell, 
and  Mr.  Powderly — should  be  sent  by  peace-loving  American 


26o 

citizens  as  a deputation  to  Europe  to  appeal  to  the  peoples  of 
Europe,  especially  appealing  to  the  organized  labor  of  Europe,  to 
join  with  them  in  making  an  appeal  to  every  government  in  the 
Old  World,  to  support  a strong  and  a peaceful  and  a progressive 
program  at  the  Hague  Conference.  (Applause.)  I believe  it 
would  be  a useful  thing  and  a very  admirable  thing,  if,  instead 
of  confining  your  export  of  traveling  Americans  to  wealthy 
millionaires  and  society  women,  you  would  send  some  of  the 
representatives  of  labor  to  meet  the  representatives  of  labor  in 
other  countries — I believe  that  if  such  a deputation  made  a 
pilgrimage,  as  I might  call  it,  it  would  shake  society  and  give 
new  hope  and  courage  to  all  those  who  are  struggling  for  the 
right  in  the  Old  World. 

The  route  that  has  been  mapped  out,  for  the  delegation  is  to 
start  from  New  York,  after  having  waited  upon  the  President 
and  the  Secretary  of  State  at  Washington ; go  to  England,  where 
they  would  be  joined  by  twelve  British  pilgrims,  see  our  King 
and  our  Government,  see  our  representative  men  and  make  them 
see  and  understand  that  America  is  in  earnest  about  this  ques- 
tion. Then,  adding  the  twelve  British  pilgrims  to  their  number, 
they  would  go  over  to  France  and  repeat  the  same  operation 
there;  and  from  France  go  on  to  Rome;  from  Rome  to  Vienna; 
to  Buda-pesth ; from  there  to  St.  Petersburg ; and  then  return, 
stopping  at  Berlin,  Brussels,  and  then  on  to  The  Hague,  where 
the  International  Deputation,  consisting  of  one  hundred  of  the 
best  and  brainiest  and  most  peace-loving  citizens  of  the  world, 
would  lay  before  the  President  of  the  Hague  Conference  the 
prayer  of  all  peace-loving  citizens  regardless  of  nationality.  And 
at  this  great  meeting  of  the . Parliament  of  the  world,  the  first 
Parliament  of  the  world  ever  assembled,  good  use  could  be  made 
of  that  deputation.  Definite  steps  would  be  taken  first  to  estab- 
lish the  principles  of  a peace  budget,  by  which  there  should  be 
a small  appropriation  made  every  year  for  the  active  work  of 
the  Peace  Movement  and  the  promotion  of  hospitality;  secondly, 
for  the  excommunication,  the  placing  under  the  ban  of  the  world, 
every  nation  which  went  to  war  without  first  asking  special 
mediation  to  see  whether  the  quarrel  could  be  adjusted  amicably 
— allowing  these  special  mediators  thirty  days’  time  in  which  to 
make  Peace;  thirdly,  for  an  arbitration  treaty  to  cover  every 
question  not  of  primary  importance,  but  for  secondary  questions 


not  affecting  vital  interests,  not  affecting  national  honor,  a 
treaty  by  which  all  nations  shall  bind  themselves  to  refer  all  such 
questions  to  arbitration.  Then  lastly,  they  could  appeal  to  the 
Conference  to  do  something  practical  to  stop  the  headlong  race 
to  ruin  and  perdition  that  is  going  on  in  the  continual  increase 
of  the  armaments  of  the  world. 

I know  that  there  are  some  people  who  want  to  go  in  for  a 
program  of  disarmament.  My  dear  friends,  I have  no  objection 
to  anybody  who  wants  to  bring  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  down 
to  this  world  by  return  of  post.  (Laughter.)  It  is  an  admirable 
thing  to  want  to  do,  but  a difficult  thing  to  get  done.  And  so 
the  question  of  disarmament  will  not  be  discussed  at  this  Hague 
Conference.  If  it  had  been  proposed  to  discuss  disarmament, 
many  of  the  great  powers  would  not  have  put  their  foot 
inside  the  Hague  Conference.  What  will  be  discussed,  thanks 
to  the  persistence  both  of  Great  Britain  and  America,  will  be  the 
question  whether  or  not  it  is  possible  for  the  next  term  of,  say, 
five  years,  for  the  nations  to  agree  not  to  increase  their  arma- 
ments beyond  the  point  which  they  have  at  present  reached. 
(Applause.)  That  would  be  the  beginning,  the  first  practical 
halt-step;  after  that,  if  we  find  that  in  five  years  we  have  not 
increased  our  armaments,  that  we  have  kept  faith  with  each 
other,  then  we  might  perhaps  simultaneously  reduce  our  arma- 
ments, so  that  we  would  not  alter  the  relative  fighting  strength 
between  one  power  and  another.  But  one  thing  at  a time.  Creep 
before  you  walk,  walk  before  you  run,  and  run  before  you  fly ; 
and  if  you  will  try,  as  the  former  speakers  at  this  Peace  Con- 
gress seemed  to  want  to  do,  to  start  flying  right  straight  up  at 
once,  you  will  only  break  your  neck  and  you  won’t  get  a bit 
farther.  (A  Voice:  Good!) 

Now,  my  friends,  I am  very  glad  that  I have  had  the  oppor- 
tunity of  speaking  to  you  just  a little  to-night,  because  I think  I 
have  given  you  a taste  of  my  quality.  (Applause  and  laughter.) 
My  quality  is  the  quality  of  a man  who  goes  straight  to  his 
point,  trailing  his  coat  for  somebody  to  tread  on  and  very  much 
disappointed  when  he  cannot  get  anybody  to  disagree  with  him 
(laughter),  because  it  is  horribly  monotonous  talking  to  people 
that  hold  the  same  opinions. 


262 

A Man  : I disagree  with  you. 

Mr.  Stead  : You  do  ? 

The  Man  : I do. 

Mr.  Stead:  Good,  good,  good;  come  along.  (Applause.) 

T he  Man  : I maintain,  that  in  spite  of  all  that  you  have 
said,  there  can  never  be  permanent  Peace  under  the  present 
system  of  exploitation  for  profit.  (Applause.)  We  know  that. 
There  is  another  thing  in  which  I disagree  with  you. 

Mr.  Stead:  May  I just  say  one  word  before  you  go  to 
the  second  point?  May  I ask  you 

The  Man  : If  you  want,  I will  sit  down.  (Cries  of  Order! 
Order !) 

Mr.  Stead:  Go  on. 

The  Man:  I did  not  mean  to  break  up  the  meeting. 

Mr.  Stead:  You  are  not  breaking  it  up — you  are  livening 
it  up. 

The  Man:  The  second  thing,  you  want  Mr.  Gompers  and 
these  men  when  they  go  to  England  to  be  honored.  Why  do 
you  say  that  those  men  who  are  upon  the  backs  of  labor  are 
the  leaders  of  labor?  So  far,  the  leaders  of  labor  are  not  yet 
here.  These  men  take  advantage  of  our  brutal  ignorance  to 
work  upon  it  with  their  speeches.  We  are  very  ignorant  and  do 
not  know  our  real  leaders,  yet  you  encourage  us  to  show  respect 
to  these  leaders  you  have  spoken  of.  You  talk  about  genius — 
We  made  the  geniuses.  (Cries  of  Order,  Order).  One  of  the 
speakers  has  mentioned  Carlyle.  But  she  did  not  read  what  hg 
says  about  hero-worship.  There  is  one  more  thing  where  I 
disagree  with  you.  You  have  all  ignored  to-night  what  inter- 
national socialism  has  done  toward  Peace.  (Applause,  and  a 
voice  “Good  Boy!”) 

Mr.  Stead:  Now  we  are  going  to  have  some  fun.  (Ap- 
plause. Laughter.)  Now,  in  the  first  place  the  speaker  who  has 
just  sat  down  said  he  disagreed  with  me.  (Tumult  and  cries  of 
“Order!  Order!”)  I take  one  at  a time.  (Laughter.)  He  said 
that  he  disagreed  with  me  because  he  said  that  nothing  could  be 
done  to  secure  permanent  Peace  until  the  present  organization  of 
society  for  the  exploitation  for  profit  was  done  away  with.  I 
should  like  to  ask  that  speaker,  how  he  knows  that  I do  not 


263 

agree  with  him.  I said  nothing  to  show  that  I did  not.  (Ap- 
plause. Laughter.)  Secondly,  he  says  that  Mr.  Gompers  and 
Mr.  Powderly  and  Mr.  Mitchell 

The  Man:  I did  not  mention  Mitchell. 

Mr.  Stead:  Well,  I will  accept  the  correction — that  the 
people  I mention  are  not  the  real  leaders  of  the  working  classes 
of  America. 

The  Man  : No. 

Mr.  Stead  : Well,  my  friends,  I have  a good  deal  of  what 
you  may  call  confidence,  and  I am  ready  to  do  a good  many 
things,  but  I should  not  want  to  attempt  to  nominate  the  men 
who  are  the  leaders  of  the  working  classes  of  America.  The 
men  composing  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  are  capable 
of  choosing  the  right  kind  of  men,  are  they  not?  I wouldn’t 
have  the  impudence  to  say  that  they  were  not,  for  I am  a for- 
eigner; I don’t  know.  If  you  think  that  that  organization  of 
laborers  of  America  are  fools,  you  are  entitled  to  your  opinion, 
but,  as  an  Englishman,  I would  not  dare  to  say  so.  (Laughter. 
Applause.)  There  is  a gentleman  over  there  (the  speaker 
pointing). 

Another  Man  : Answer  the  third  question.  The  socialist 
movement. 

Mr.  Stead:  Yes,  I beg  your  pardon.  I understood  you  to 
ask  me  whether  international  socialism  had  done  anything  to 
promote  Peace?  I think  that  international  socialism  has  distinctly 
been  a good  influence  in  putting  the  fear  of  God  into  the  hearts 
of  the  various  nations.  (Applause.)  I think  that  the  dread  of  the 
growth  of  socialism  is  the  one  terror  which  appeals  to  some  per- 
sons who  are  very  strongly  in  favor  of  going  on  with  more  and 
more  military  expenditures,  to  think  once  and  twice  and  even 
thrice  before  they  go  farther  in  that  direction.  But  may  I give 
you  one  word  of  advice?  I give  it  to  you  with  the  best  good- 
will in  the  world.  Do  not  assume  that  a man  disagrees  with  you 
until  you  have  proof  that  he  does.  (Applause  and  cries  of  ‘Hear! 
Hear!”) 

A Man  (in  the  left-hand  corner  of  the  hall)  : You’re  all 
right,  Billy! 


264 

Mr.  Buchanan  : As  Chairman  of  this  meeting  I want  to 
lay  down  the  rules  which  govern  these  questions.  M'r.  Stead 
very  graciously  is  willing  to  face  any  questions,  and  he  has 
shown  his  ability  to  answer,  but  in  the  absence  of  the  officials  of 
the  American  Federation  of  Labor  here,  I will  not  tolerate  any 
assault  upon  their  reputations  or  character.  (Applause.  Cheer- 
ing.) If  you  desire  to  ask  any  questions  that  involve  principle, 
I am  satisfied  Mr.  Stead  will  answer  them,  but  you  must  not 
insult  the  American  labor  movement  by  impugning  the  motives 
of  its  leaders.  (Applause.)  I won’t  have  it. 

Another  Man  : These  men  that  Mr.  Stead  wants  to  send 
to  Europe  are,  as  a matter  of  fact,  the  leaders  of  the  working- 
men in  America  to-day.  We  know  that.  Whether  they  should 
be  or  not  is  another  question.  I am  not  going  to  say  anything 
about  that.  I want  to  say  that  I differ  with  you,  Mr.  Stead. 
When  you  got  up  there  at  first,  you  said  you  were  surprised  that 
you  could  have  talked  so  much  at  all  these  Peace  Meetings  and 
nobody  ever  come  back  at  you.  If  you  came  to  the  Cooper 
Union  meetings  held  here  every  week,  you  would  find  that  at 
all  these  meetings  we  always  get  back  at  the  speaker.  And  the 
only  reason  that  you  and  the  rest  of  the  speakers  up  there  to- 
night have  it  all  your  own  way  was  because  there  were  so  many 
of  you  there.  (Laughter.)  We  had  to  give  you  a chance.  But 
I want  to  say  this : that  I thoroughly  agree  in  some  respects 
with  my  friend  on  the  left.  There  is  a force  making  for  Inter- 
national Peace  in  the  world  to-day,  and  it  has  done  more  for 
International  Peace  than  all  the  Hague  Conferences  held  for 
the  past  seventy-five  years.  (A  voice,  “Good  Boy!”) 

Chancellor  von  Buelow,  of  the  German  Empire,  has  stated 
distinctly  that  the  greatest  force  making  for  International  Peace 
in  the  world  to-day  is  the  international  movement  of  the  social- 
ist party  of  the  world.  (Applause,  and  a voice,  “Good  Boy!”) 
Chancellor  von  Buelow  ought  to  know,  because  he  was  preceded 
by  Mr.  Bismarck,  the  man  of  “blood  and  iron,”  and  that  man 
of  blood  and  iron  tried  to  stop  the  socialist  movement  for  ten 
years,  but  came  to  the  conclusion  that  the  best  thing  to  do  was 
to  conciliate  the  socialist  movement;  and  so  he  tried  to  con- 
ciliate it  then,  but  it  kept  growing  and  growing  all  the  time. 
And  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  international  socialist 


From  Stereograph,  Copyright  1907,  by  Underwood  & Underwood.  New  York. 


A Peace  Congress  Audience 


THE  LIBRARY 
Of  THE 

UNIVERSITY  Of  1LLIR01S 


265 

movement  has  done  more  for  Peace  than  all  the  Hague  Con- 
ferences that  ever  were  held,  there  was  not  a single  word  said 
about  it  here  to-night  upon  the  platform.  There  was  not  a 
single  person  invited  to  speak  who  was  known  to  be  a socialist 
and  who  would  speak  upon  International  Peace  from  a socialist 
standpoint.  (Applause  and  cheering  and  cries  of  “Good  Boy!”) 
I will  tell  you  one  more  thing,  and  then  I will  be  through.  (Cries 
of  “Order ! Order ! Sit  down ! Sit  down !”)  Can  I say — (A  voice, 
“Say  it!”) — they  were  going  to  send  an  expedition  from  the 
German  Empire  to  help  the  Czar  of  Russia  to  put  down  a rebel- 
lion in  Russia,  but  the  leader  of  the  Social  Democracy,  August 
Bebel,  told  the  German  Emperor  that  if  that  fleet  was  sent,  he 
would  have  trouble  in  his  own  domain.  (Applause.)  Almost  the 
same  thing  happened  in  your  own  country  when  they  were  going 
to  send  a fleet  out  to  shake  hands  with  Russia,  and  if  I recollect 
aright,  your  own  labor  members  told  them  to  keep  that  fleet 
away.  Those  are  the  things  that  are  making  for  International 
Peace,  and  I tell  you  that  they  will  make  for  International  Peace. 
If  that  committee  you  speak  about,  that  you  would  like  to  have 
visit  England,  if  they  were  to  visit  there  they  would  not  be  much 
needed,  because  we  are  going  to  send  over  about  fifty  now,  and 
if  those  fifty  men  cannot  do  it,  then  your  sixty  men  cannot  do  it. 
If  those  sixty  that  you  have  spoken  about  will  go  to  President 
Roosevelt  and  in  the  name  of  organized  labor  of  the  United  States 
demand  that  he  shall  not  build  any  more  battleships  for  another 
year  and  a half,  until  1909,  then  they  would  have  something  to 
present  to  the  other  nations,  who  might  follow  in  our  wake. 
Unless  something  of  that  kind  is  done,  nothing  substantial  will 
take  place.  (Great  applause.) 

Another  Man  : I want  to  say  with  reference  to  the  speaker 
of  the  evening  and  the  first  question,  Mir.  Stead  wrote  a book 
in  which  he  described  Chicago  and  the  great  Pullman  Strike. 
Mr.  Stead  stated  in  that  book  that  capitalism  was  not  the  evil 
from  which  the  workingman  suffered.  So  Mr.  Stead  cannot  agree 
with  the  first  questioner  in  regard  to  the  first  question,  unless  he 
has  changed  his  mind  since  those  days.  I don’t  know.  Mr.  Stead 
stated  plainly  in  that  book  that  it  was  not  capitalism  from  which 
the  working  class  suffered.  That  was  during  the  great  Pullman 
strike  in  Chicago.  I still  have  the  book  in  my  possession. 


266 

Mr.  Stead  : I should  like  very  much  to  see  that  book.  I 
do  not  remember  the  passage  you  refer  to.  I should  be  very 
glad  to  see  it. 

Mr.  Buchanan  : I want  to  say  that  my  attention  has  been 
called  to  the  fact  that  the  time  at  which  the  trustees  of  this  insti- 
tute expect  these  meetings  to  close  has  passed.  Now,  if  this  is 
permitted  to  go  on,  we  shall  be  here  until  morning,  because  some 
people  are  willing  to  stay  until  morning  to  get  in  their  questions 
and  talk  on  the  floor.  We  cannot  permit  this.  Mr.  Stead  has 
been  very  generous  in  giving  up  his  time  in  this  way. 

Mr.  Stead:  I like  it,  my  friends.  (Laughter.) 

Mr.  Buchanan  : Mr.  Stead  likes  it,  and  we  are  glad  he 
does  like  it,  and  we  do  not  dislike  it  ourselves,  but  Mr.  Smith 
will  explain  the  situation. 

Mr.  Smith  : The  janitors  of  the  building  live  at  a consid- 
erable distance  from  the  building,  and  they  want  to  go  home  and 
get  sleep  so  as  to  get  up  and  do  a day’s  work  to-morrow. 

Mr.  Stead:  One  thing  before  you  go. 

Mr.  Buchanan  : Mr.  Stead  wants  a word  in  conclusion 

now. 

Mr.  Stead:  On  Friday  night  I am  going  to  be  here  again. 

Mr.  Smith  : Silence,  so  you  can  hear  Mr.  Stead. 

Mr.  Stead:  I am  going  to  be  here  on  Friday  night  at  eight 
o’clock,  and  I will  give  you  a talk  of  an  hour,  and  then  we  will 
have  two  hours  of  hoggey-boggey,  and  I hope  that  you  won’t 
be  deterred  by  having  so  many  on  the  platform.  In  fact,  if  you 
like,  there  shall  be  nobody  on  the  platform  but  myself  and  the 
chairman.  That  will  give  you  an  opportunity  for  questioning, 
but  I do  hope  that  when  we  come  to  the  questioning  you  will 
stick  to  the  point  and  put  definite  questions,  asking  for  informa- 
tion, and  I will  answer  to  the  best  of  my  ability.  I look  forward 
with  great  joy  to  our  having  a really  good  time  Friday  night. 
(Great  applause.) 


267 


CONFERENCE  FOR  PEACE  WORKERS 

Tabernacle  Church 

Wednesday  Morning,  April  Seventeenth,  at  9.30 
MRS.  LUCIA  AMES  MEAD  Presiding 


Mrs.  Mead  : 

I have  great  pleasure  in  opening  this  meeting,  as  it  ought  to 
be  opened,  with  a word  from  that  society  which  is  the  oldest 
peace  organization  in  the  world — the  society  founded  by  George 
Fox,  the  contemporary  of  Bunyan  and  Milton.  We  have  as  our 
first  speaker,  Mrs.  Elizabeth  Powell  Bond,  of  New  Jersey,  the 
late  Dean  of  Swarthmore  College,  and  she  comes  representing 
the  Society  of  Friends  which  has  done  so  much  for  the  cause  of 
Peace — Mrs.  Bond. 

Friends  as  Promoters  of  Peace 

Elizabeth  Powell  Bond 

Any  statement  of  the  work  of  the  Religious  Society  of  Friends 
in  behalf  of  Peace,  is  of  necessity  in  some  measure  a history  of 
the  Society  itself.  The  convictions  of  George  Fox  concerning 
war,  so  clearly  in  accord  with  the  teachings  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, placed  him  at  variance  both  with  the  commander  of  the 
Puritan  army,  and  with  the  37th  Article  of  Religion  agreed 
upon  in  the  Convocation  of  the  Clergy  of  the  Church  of  England 
that  “It  is  lawful  for  Christian  men,  at  the  commandment  of  the 
magistrate,  to  wear  weapons,  and  to  serve  in  the  wars.”  (Thomas 
Hodgkin’s  “George  Fox,”  p.  41.)  George  Fox  had  pressed 
upon  him  a captaincy  in  the  army  of  Oliver  Cromwell,  of  which 
he  says,  “I  told  him  I knew  whence  all  wars  arose,  even  from 
the  lusts,  according  to  James’  doctrine;  and  that  I live  in  the 
virtue  of  that  life  and  power  that  took  away  the  occasion  of  all 
war.”  (Rufus  M.  Jones’  “Journal  of  George  Fox,”  p.  128.) 
Later,  when  imprisoned  in  Lancaster  on  the  charge  of  endeav- 
oring “to  raise  insurrections  to  embroil  the  nation  in  blood”  he 


268 


declared  “my  weapons  are  spiritual,  which  take  away  the  occa- 
sion of  war,  and  lead  into  Peace.  ...  I was  never  an  enemy 
to  the  King,  nor  to  any  man’s  person  upon  the  earth.  I am  in 
the  love  that  fulfils  the  law,  which  thinks  no  evil,  but  loves 
even  enemies.”  (Rufus  M.  Jones,  p.  348.)  During  his  years  of 
imprisonment  in  English  jails,  when  he  was  almost  wholly  cut 
off  from  those  in  sympathy  with  his  teachings,  it  is  evident  that 
he  pondered  deeply  upon  the  very  practical  question  of  making 
most  effectual  the  revelations  to  him  of  truth. 

The  plan  of  organization,  formulated  in  the  Rules  of  Disci- 
pline and  Advices,  reached  every  individual  member  within  the 
fold,  and  established  an  unbroken  chain  of  fellowship,  of  respon- 
sibility for  one  another,  and  of  teaching  concerning  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  the  Society.  Thus  it  is  that  the  message  of 
George  Fox  to  Cromwell’s  soldiers  reached  from  the  center  to 
the  circumference  of  the  Society,  permeating  all  its  membership. 
In  the  several  yearly  meetings  of  the  present  day  in  which  are 
met  together  the  chosen  representatives  of  all  the  subordinate 
meetings,  there  is  always  read  this  query  whose  answer  literally 
takes  cognizance  of  every  individual  member — “Do  you  maintain 
a faithful  testimony  in  favor  of  Peace  and  Arbitration,  and 
against  war  and  the  preparations  for  and  excitements  to  it?” 
(Discipline  of  Philadelphia  Yearly  Meeting,  1894.) 

There  is  not  only  this  direct  appeal  concerning  military 
service,  but  the  teaching  goes  still  deeper — to  the  very  root  of 
the  matter.  In  a manuscript  copy  of  the  “Rules  and  Discipline” 
of  1676,  possibly  from  the  hand  of  George  Fox  himself,  it  is 
“Advised  that  Friends  be  tender  to  the  Principle  of  God  in 
All,  and  shun  the  occasion  of  vain  Disputes  and  Janglings,  both 
among  themselves  and  Others;  for  that  many  times  is  like  a 
blustering  Wind,  that  hurts  and  bruises  the  tender  Buds  and 
Plants.”  In  the  latest  issue  of  the  Discipline  of  the  Philadelphia 
Yearly  Meeting  of  Friends  (1894)  there  is  detailed  advice 
concerning  the  duties  of  arbitrators  when  differences  arise 
between  any  of  its  members  about  property.  “It  is  further 
earnestly  advised  that  Friends  do  not  go  to  law,  particularly 
with  one  another.  If,  for  any  reason,  one  should  think  himself 
under  necessity  to  bring  an  action  against  a fellow-member,  let 
him  consult  the  overseers  or  other  judicious  Friends  before 
proceeding.”  Nor  does  the  care  of  the  meeting  end  here.  In 


269 

every  local  meeting,  thrice  during  the  year,  there  are  asked  and 
answered  for  the  information  of  the  Yearly  Meeting,  these  three 
searching  questions,  “Are  love  and  unity  maintained  among 
you  ? Are  tale-bearing  and  detraction  discouraged  ? When 
differences  arise,  are  endeavors  used  speedily  to  end  them  ?” 
Here,  we  reach  the  very  roots  of  war ! There  is  a tradition  that 
when  the  Egyptians  prayed  again  and  again  to  Osiris  for  release 
from  a plague  of  crocodiles,  deliverance  came  finally  through  the 
little  ichneumon  that  diligently  destroyed  the  eggs  of  the  great 
reptiles.  For  more  than  two  hundred  years  the  Society  of 
Friends  has  carried  on  this  work  against  war,  at  its  very  roots. 
It  has  striven  to  abolish  armies  by  teaching  men  to  be  makers 
of  Peace.  In  every  community  where  Friends  are  to  be  found, 
small  though  their  numbers  be,  and  creating  no  apparent  ripple 
upon  the  surface  of  its  life,  this  leavening  principle  of  love  has 
been  at  work.  It  may  be  that  this  work  nearly  hidden  in  the 
seclusion  of  a small  company  of  quiet  people  has  helped  more 
than  could  be  computed  toward  the  establishment  of  Peace. 
William  Penn’s  plan  in  1693  for  a European  Council  of  Arbi- 
tration may  have  been  the  seed  of  the  International  Peace 
Congress  at  The  Hague  in  1899. 

“Are  love  and  unity  maintained  amongst  you?”  Who  that 
loves  his  neighbor  could  trespass  upon  his  rights ; could  encroach 
upon  his  boundaries ; could  enter  into  a quarrel  with  him ; could 
go  to  war  with  him  in  the  courts  ? “Are  tale-bearing  and  detrac- 
tion discouraged?”  We  disinfect  our  houses  when  there  is  a 
suspicion  of  diphtheria  germs ; not  less  poisonous  is  the  habit  of 
repeating  ill  reports  of  our  neighbor — it  makes  the  very  food 
that  the  war  spirit  grows  strong  upon ! “When  differences  arise 
is  care  taken  speedily  to  end  them?”  How  many  times  a calm 
word  of  explanation  would  take  away  all  the  sting  of  a “differ- 
ence,” and  change  haters  into  lovers ! Think  what  it  might  be 
to  the  world  if,  in  every  church-service  the  world  over — 
Christian,  Hebrew,  Mohammedan,  Buddhist,  there  were  incor- 
porated with  its  declaration  of  creed  this  further  declaration,  “I 
believe  that  love  and  unity  should  be  maintained  among  us.  I 
believe  that  tale  bearing  and  detraction  should  be  discouraged.  I 
believe  that  when  differences  arise,  care  should  be  taken  speedily 
to  end  them.”  Think  what  it  might  be  to  the  world  if  in  every 


270 

home  the  world  over,  there  were  established  this  family  altar  to 
Peace ! 

It  should  be  added,  that  while  this  radical  work  for  Peace 
has  been  a distinguishing  characteristic  of  Friends,  it  is  also  true 
that  they  have  labored  in  behalf  of  arbitration  and  in  co-operation 
with  other  Peace  Societies.  Nor  have  they  escaped  altogether  in 
these  latter  days  the  test  of  persecution.  During  the  Boer 
War  members  of  the  Rowntree  family  in  Scarborough,  England, 
invited  Mr.  Cronwright-Shreiner  to  give  an  address  on  “The 
Conditions  of  a Durable  Peace  in  South  Africa.”  This  was  con- 
strued into  opposition  to  the  government;  and  a mob  visited 
retribution  upon  the  Rowntrees  in  the  destruction  of  their  prop- 
erty to  the  amount  of  many  hundreds  of  pounds  and  their  narrow 
escape  from  severe  personal  injury.  The  address  of  these  Friends 
to  their  townsmen  shortly  after  the  riot  is  worthy  of  their  inher- 
itance from  those  who  paid  with  their  lives  the  price  of  liberty  of 
speech.  In  this  address  they  said : “We  wish  to  state  that  it  is 
not  our  intention  to  make  claim  against  the  Borough  Fund  for 
property  damaged  or  destroyed  during  the  riot  which  occurred. 
Our  convictions  on  some  great  questions  are,  we  know,  different 
from  those  of  the  majority  of  our  fellow-countrymen;  but  for 
these  convictions  we  must  render  our  account  not^to  men  but  to 
God.” 

The  world  fears  that  without  the  discipline  of  war,  for  obedi- 
ence to  command,  and  fearlessness  on  the  battlefield,  life  would 
grow  “flat,  stale  and  unprofitable” ; and  that  heroism  would 
become  atrophied.  This  need  not  be  feared.  Obedience  to  com- 
mand is  one  of  the  disciplines  of  business  and  industrial  life.  So 
long  as  railroad  engineers  drive  their  engines  at  express  speed 
through  the  darkness  of  night,  and  sailors  guide  their  great  steam- 
ships in  the  face  of  the  tempest,  manhood  will  not  lose  its  school- 
ing for  noble  courage.  I have  seen  college  boys,  much  given  over 
apparently  to  the  sportiveness  of  youth,  cast  fear  to  the  winds  at 
the  sound  of  the  fire-alarm,  and  mounting  the  peak  of  the  roof 
of  their  science  building,  their  soaked  garments  freezing  in  the 
wintry  cold,  and  the  fire  threatening  the  timbers  which  were  their 
support,  stand  at  their  post  of  danger  till  the  flames  were  sub- 
dued. 

It  is  a high-water  mark  of  civilization  that  this  memorable 
Congress  is  in  progress.  It  has  opened  to  us  anew  the  vast  field 


271 

for  legislative  and  judicial  action  which  waits  the  Conference 
at  The  Hague.  And  it  has  deepened  our  conviction  that  a great, 
availing  service  is  delegated  to  each  individual  of  us  all  in 
destroying  the  seeds  and  the  roots  of  war  by  the  nurture  of  those 
things  that  make  for  Peace. 

Mrs.  Mead: 

We  have  among  us,  as  you  know,  one  great  society  which, 
with  the  Peace  Society,  has  done  much,  at  least  among  women  of 
the  United  States,  to  promote  the  cause  of  Peace — the  Women’s 
Christian  Temperance  Union ; and  I have  the  honor  of  present- 
ing to  you  this  mornirig,  as  the  representative  of  that  society, 
Mrs.  Hannah  J.  Bailey,  of  Maine,  the  Superintendent  of  the 
Peace  Department  of  the  National  and  International  Women’s 
Christian  Temperance  Union. 

Woman’s  Place  in  the  Peace  Reform  Movement 

Hannah  J.  Bailey 

It  has  been  said  that  there  is  no  important  subject  in  which 
woman  is  not  concerned.  Certainly  she  has  a place  in  the  work 
for  Peace  and  Arbitration.  One  of  the  most  efficient  lines  of 
effort  in  which  she  can  engage  to  promote  the  interests  of  this 
worthy  cause  is  to  help  mould  public  opinion.  Arbitration  would 
be  the  only  means  resorted  to  in  the  settlement  of  national  diffi- 
culties if  people  would  always  speak  of  it  in  as  enthusiastic  terms 
as  they  now  often  speak  of  warfare,  and  if  they  would  cease 
declaring  the  world  is  not  ready  for  it. 

Mothers  should  teach  their  children  that  there  is  a higher 
form  of  patriotism  than  that  whose  aim  is  to  destroy  human  life. 
They  have  too  long  taught  that  patriotism  and  military  glory  are 
synonomous  terms.  Probably  there  is  no  word  made  so  sus- 
ceptible of  contradictory  definitions  as  that  one  word  “patriotism.” 
“Through  the  use  of  it,”  as  Mrs.  Sewall  has  said,  “appeals  are 
often  made  to  the  lowest  selfishness  and  the  highest  arrogance 
of  the  human  heart.”  There  is  nothing  in  which  the  public  needs 
revival  of  instruction  more  than  in  regard  to  this  same  quality, 
patriotism.  If  a woman  really  loves  her  country  and  is  willing 
to  live  for  it,  and  work  for  it,  and  to  die  working  for  it  and  for 
humanity,  it  does  not  follow  that  she  believes  that  any  wrong 


272 

should  be  overlooked.  She  simply  claims  that  as  she  settles  the 
children’s  disputes  in  her  home,  not  in  a haphazard  way,  but  by 
reasoning  with  each,  having  a reckoning  with  those  at  fault,  so 
should  nations  conduct  themselves.  When  this  time  shall 
come 

“And  sovereign  law,  the  world’s  collected  will  o’er  thrones 
and  globes  elate, 

Sits  empress  crowning  good,  suppressing  ill,” 
the  Golden  Rule  can  be  applied  to  society,  custom  and  law,  and 
the  beautiful  Golden  Age  will  dawn  for  “only  the  Golden  Rule  of 
Christ  can  bring  the  Golden  Age  of  Man.” 

The  first  duty  which  we  have  is  to  conform  our  ideas  to  the 
highest  desirable  attainment  possible,  and  to  hold  them  there  till 
the  world  shall  be  lifted  to  that  plane  by  our  patient  purpose. 

Someone  has  said,  “War  will  never  cease  till  woman  finds 
herself.  The  spiritual  power  of  the  awakened  woman-soul  would 
quench  the  spirit  of  war  as  water  quenches  fire.”  The  Woman's 
Christian  Temperance  Union  is  seeking  to  awaken  women  to  an 
interest  in  this  great  work  of  helping  to  rid  the  world  of  its 
hydra-headed  enemy — militarism.  Its  department  of  Peace  and 
Arbitration  was  adopted  at  an  annual  convention  held  in  Nash- 
ville, Tenn.,  in  1887,  and  the  World’s  W.  C.  T.  U.  adopted  the 
department  two  years  later.  Since  then  auxiliary  departments 
have  been  organized  in  twenty-eight  States  and  one  Territory, 
and  in  fourteen  foreign  countries.  Good  local  work  on  its  lines 
of  effort  for  the  promotion  of  Peace  principles  has  been  done  in 
all  states  and  in  all  civilized  nations.  The  department  aims  espe- 
cially to  promulgate  these  principles  among  women  and  chil- 
dren. It  also  sends  Peace  memorials  to  various  conferences  in 
this  and  other  countries  and  secures  the  adoption  of  Peace  resolu- 
tions in  conventions  and  various  religious  and  philanthropic 
organizations.  It  circulates  petitions  and  sends  protests  and  let- 
ters bearing  upon  the  subject  to  the  proper  officials.  It  utilizes 
the  public  press  as  a potent  agency.  A very  important  part  of 
its  work  is  against  military  training  in  secular  and  Sunday 
schools.  It  aims  to  reach  the  children  in  the  homes,  the  schools 
and  the  Loyal  Temperance  Legions,  and  to  lift  them  to  a plane 
where  they  will  despise  physical  combat. 

Many  years  ago  thousands  of  children  in  Europe  were 
enlisted  in  a crusade  to  Palestine  with  the  hope  of  taking  the 


273 

sepulchre  of  Jesus  Christ  from  non-Christian  people.  This 
crusade  forms  one  of  the  most  cruel  chapters  of  human  history. 
Many  of  the  boys  and  girls  who  entered  it  left  their  comfortable 
homes  to  suffer  and  to  die  on  foreign  soil. 

The  children  of  to-day  are  engaged  in  a nobler  crusade — that 
of  saving  living  humanity  from  the  almost  certain  sepulchre  of 
militarism  toward  which  it  is  drifting.  They  can  save  the  world 
from  warfare  which  is  a form  of  fratricide.  They  can  bring 
about  a time  when  there  will  be : “A  parliament  of  man — a 
federation  of  the  world.” 

The  World’s  Woman’s  Christian  Temperance  Union  stands 
for  the  promotion  of  every  moral  reform.  Next  to  the  Temper- 
ance Reform,  and  closely  in  touch  with  it,  is  that  of  Peace  as 
opposed  to  carnal  warfare. 

We  have  received  reports  the  last  year  from  twenty-three 
different  countries.  More  general  and  local  efforts  have  been 
put  forth ; more  work  accomplished ; more  peace  sermons 
preached;  public  meetings  with  programs  held;  peace  resolu- 
tions presented  and  adopted  at  conventions  and  conferences,  and 
more  personal  work  has  been  done  and  influence  exerted  for  the 
promulgation  of  peace  principles  than  ever  before. 

There  is  abundant  evidence  of  a growing  sentiment  for 
Peace  among  nations  all  along  the  line.  A sense  of  interna- 
tional justice  is  developing  year  by  year,  and  we  find  the  same 
regard  for  law  which  is  found  in  civil  society  forcing  itself  into 
the  relations  of  the  world. 

Our  department  of  Peace  and  Arbitration  is  arrayed  against 
lynching,  capital  punishment,  carnal  warfare,  and  every  form  of 
“man’s  inhumanity  to  man.”  We  claim  that  to  voluntarily  take 
human  life  is  overstepping  the  bounds  of  human  authority,  and 
should  never  be  tolerated. 

In  those  nations  where  the  military  life  is  regarded  as  the 
most  important  life,  military  achievements  as  the  greatest  achieve- 
ments and  military  pursuits  as  the  most  honorable  and  fame- 
worthy pursuits,  the  advancement  of  women  has  been  longest 
retarded;  but  where  the  military  functions  have  become  least 
significant  women  have  the  greatest  freedom  and  the  largest 
sphere  of  action.  Christianity  brought  with  it  a respect  for 
womanhood  which  the  ancient  world  never  knew. 

18 


274 

Doubtless  warfare  can  be  abolished  more  easily  and  quickly 
by  promulgating  and  advocating  Peace  principles  and  Arbitration 
than  by  considering  the  evils  of  warfare.  It  is  better  to  crowd 
out  the  harmful  by  the  good,  to  discuss  the  blessings  of  Peace 
more  than  the  cruelties  of  war.  Women  can  do  much  in  training 
their  children.  There  is  great  hope  with  them.  If  they  are 
rightly  trained  in  this  generation,  in  the  next  generation  the 
world  will  be  at  Peace,  and  the  prophecy  of  Victor  Hugo  will  be 
fully  verified,  that,  “in  the  twentieth  century  war  will  cease.” 

There  is  much  encouragement  in  the  fact  that  large  labor 
organizations,  including  many  women,  have  declared  against 
military  burdens  and  tyrannies  which  affect  them. 

There  is  a resolute  demand  for  the  light  of  publicity  on  the 
causes  of  the  quarrels  of  clans  in  the  industrial  world  and  for 
fairness  in  the  adjustment  of  such  troubles.  These  are  some  of 
the  waves  of  a new  era  of  human  brotherhood  in  which  “love 
shall  tread  out  the  baleful  fire  of  anger  and  in  its  ashes  plant  the 
tree  of  Peace.” 

Thinking  people  throughout  the  civilized  world  are  realizing 
as  never  before  that  love  is  the  only  power  that  can  cement  and 
bind  together,  and  that  hate,  anger  and  fear  are  disintegrating 
forces,  not  only  in  the  relations  of  individuals  to  their  fellows, 
and  nation  to  nation,  but  in  the  human  system  as  well,  medical 
science  having  now  discovered  that  anger,  grief  and  fear  gen- 
erate a poison  in  the  system. 

The  Woman’s  Arbitration  League  and  other  organizations 
of  women,  besides  the  Woman’s  Christian  Temperance  Union, 
are  exerting  an  influence  in  all  the  civilized  world.  They  are 
promulgating  the  principles  of  Peace  and  Arbitration  by  the  aid 
of  the  public  press,  by  lectures,  public  meetings,  mothers’  meet- 
ings, children’s  organizations,  distributing  literature,  circulating 
petitions,  and  by  personal  efforts  with  legislators  and  influential 
persons.  They  are  sending  petitions  and  also  words  of  apprecia- 
tion of  good  deeds  to  earthly  monarchs,  and  are  sending  their 
appeals  to  the  King  of  Kings,  the  Lord  of  Lords,  the  Prince  of 
Peace. 

Let  us  hope  that  the  optimistic  prophecies  of  many  Peace 
advocates  in  this  new  century  will  come  to  pass,  and  let  us  work 
as  if  we  hope,  and  in  proof  of  our  faith.  If  we  do  this  some  of 


275 

us  may  celebrate  the  glorious  bloodless  victory  of  Peace  over 
warfare. 

Mrs.  Mead: 

I am  particularly  glad  that  Mrs.  Bailey  touched  upon  this 
question  of  patriotism.  I believe  that  the  teaching  of  patriotism 
in  the  schools  is  very  closely  connected  with  this  whole  question  of 
internationalism.  Unless  it  is  rightly  taught,  it  will  do  vastly 
more  harm  than  good.  Our  children  have  been  in  the  past  brought 
up  to  connect  the  idea  of  patriotism  with  a gun,  and  it  is  for  the 
mothers  and  the  teachers  of  to-day  to  recognize  that  there  is  no 
necessary  connection  between  those  two;  that  we  have  had  Peace 
in  this  country  nine-tenths  of  the  time,  and  that  only  a tiny  frac- 
tion, perhaps  not  more  than  100,000  of  all  the  eighty  millions 
of  people  in  this  country  are  to-day  under  arms  in  our  army 
and  navy.  It  is  an  astounding  thing  that  we  allow  a generation 
of  young  children  to  grow  up  fancying  that  patriotism  is  some- 
thing that  is  peculiarly  connected  with  the  army  and  navy  more 
than  with  the  professional  man,  or  business  man,  laborer,  farmer 
or  craftsman.  We  must  endeavor  to  change  this  false  emphasis 
and  show  that  service  of  country  is  the  duty  of  every  citizen 
every  month  of  every  year.  Good  citizenship  is  the  larger  part  of 
patriotism.  Let  us  not  think  of  it  as  a dull,  tame  duty,  but 
ennoble  it  with  all  the  honor  that  is  attached  to  that  sacred  word 
— patriotism. 

We  have  as  our  next  speaker  a lady  who  comes  in  a double 
capacity;  she  is  connected  with  one  of  the  New  York  school 
boards,  and  therefore  can  speak  with  authority  as  to  what  is 
being  done  in  the  schools  in  New  York;  she  also  comes  as  the 
representative  of  the  Woman’s  Peace  Circle  of  New  York,  which 
started  before  the  present  New  York  Peace  Society.  I have 
the  great  pleasure  of  presenting  to  you  Mrs.  Harry  Hastings. 

Peace  in  the  Public  Schools 

Mrs.  Harry  Hastings 

Madam  Chairman  and  Friends:  It  is  my  peculiar  priv- 
ilege to  talk  to  you  this  morning  as  a New  York  woman  repre- 
senting the  various  women’s  societies  in  this  state  and  city  work- 
ing for  the  Peace  Movement.  The  ones  which  I particularly 


276 

represent  are  the  Woman’s  Peace  Circle  of  New  York  City,  the 
Wm.  Lloyd  Garrison  Equal  Rights  Association,  and  the  New 
York  State  Woman  Suffrage  Association. 

The  Woman’s  Peace  Circle,  as  it  is  an  organization  of  this 
city,  is,  perhaps,  of  more  immediate  interest.  It  was  organized 
by  me  in  March,  1905,  with  the  co-operation  of  Mrs.  Arnold 
Schramm,  and  on  the  suggestion  of  Mrs.  Lucia  Ames  Mead, 
whom  we  have  the  honor  to  have  acting  as  our  chairman  to-day. 

The  Woman’s  Peace  Circle  at  once  planned  a Peace  meeting, 
and  this  was  accordingly  held  in  the  Madison  Square  Theatre  on 
May  18,  the  anniversary  of  The  Hague  Conference.  It  was  a 
very  successful  demonstration,  largely  attended  and  addressed 
by  prominent  advocates  of  the  Peace  cause. 

Out  of  this  public  meeting  has  grown,  I believe,  an  educa- 
tional movement  among  the  women  here  in  New  York  in  regard 
to  the  Peace  Movement,  of  which  before  they  had  somewhat 
hazy  ideas. 

The  Peace  Circle  has  held  regular  meetings,  again  observed 
the  anniversary  of  The  Hague  Conference  in  1906,  and  intends 
to  do  so  this  year,  also,  at  the  Hotel  Astor  on  the  evening  of 
May  18. 

It  has  given  its  special  attention  recently  to  the  education  of 
the  public  in  regard  to  the  Fourth  of  July  celebration.  The 
President  of  the  Peace  Circle,  Mrs.  Benedict,  is  greatly  interested 
in  having  a more  rational  method  of  observing  the  anniversary 
of  the  nation’s  independence,  and  has  carefully  studied  the  ques- 
tion, and  has  shown,  very  clearly,  the  devastations  in  life  and 
property  all  over  the  country  on  that  day  due  to  the  use  of 
toys,  firearms  and  fireworks  generally.  It  is  planned  eventually 
to  interest  the  various  woman’s  organizations  in  some  practical 
plan  to  discountenance  this  barbarous  method  of  expressing  our 
feelings  on  the  Fourth  of  July.  This  society  also  has  written  to 
the  State  Superintendent  of  Education  as  well  as  the  City  Super- 
intendent requesting  exercises  in  the  schools  in  commemoration 
of  The  Hague  Conference  on  May  18. 

The  Wm.  Lloyd  Garrison  Equal  Rights  Association,  as  the 
honored  name  it  bears  would  indicate,  stands  for  Peace  in  all  the 
relations  of  life  and  is  most  particularly  interested  in  the  Peace 


cause. 


277 

It  has  already  held  a Peace  celebration  this  spring  at  the 
Martha  Washington  Hotel,  and  was  addressed  by  one  of  the 
Executive  Committee  of  the  present  Congress,  Mrs.  Anna  Garlin 
Spencer  (applause),  who  has  done  such  glorious  service  in  order 
to  make  this  great  Congress  a success,  her  subject  being  “Woman 
and  Militarism/’  Prof.  Ernst  Richard,  of  Columbia  University 
and  President  of  the  German-American  Peace  Society,  and  Mrs. 
Rachel  Foster- Avery,  Secretary  of  the  International  Woman’s 
Suffrage  Association,  also  spoke  on  various  features  of  the  Peace 
Movement.  Mrs.  Mead,  our  Chairman,  referred  to  me  in  her 
introduction  as  a local  school  board  member  of  this  city,  and  has 
suggested  that  I say  a few  words  in  regard  to  working  for  Peace 
in  our  public  schools.  Miss  Addams  very  truly  said  in  her 
address  yesterday  that  in  order  to  do  away  with  the  ideals  of 
war  we  must  substitute  the  ideals  of  Peace. 

The  constructive  policy  of  Peace,  however,  is  a very  difficult 
one  for  educators  in  the  face  of  the  intense  grasp  on  the  young 
mind  of  that  of  war.  Moreover,  just  now,  with  the  advent  of 
this  purpose  to  inaugurate  a constructive  policy  which  must  carry 
with  it,  perforce,  the  destruction  of  the  methods  and  aims  of 
warfare,  there  is  a very  recent  but  widespread  movement  all 
over  our  country,  that  perhaps  you  are  not  aware  of,  to  perpetuate 
and  emphasize  militarism  with  its  spectacular  and  hence  most 
attractive  glory. 

I believe  myself  this  is  due  to  the  peculiar  characteristics  of 
our  President,  Mr.  Roosevelt,  and  it  would  not  be  very  far  from 
the  truth  to  denominate  him,  in  spite  of  his  services  in  the  cause 
of  Peace,  the  pacificator  militant.  We  must  all  admit  that  his 
influence  in  the  direction  of  exalting  the  spirit  and  glory  of  war 
is  felt  strongly  throughout  our  country.  I would  not  quite  say 
that  the  result  of  this  is  to  arouse  a warlike  spirit  in  the  youth 
of  our  land,  but  it  certainly  arouses  in  them  a strong  admiration 
for  war  ideals. 

How  far  this  contemporary  spirit  of  military  glory  and 
display  is  carried  you  may  well  understand  by  the  recently  issued 
prospectus  of  the  Jamestown  Exposition. 

Two  days  ago  I received  a little  pamphlet  from  the  press 
of  the  Jamestown  Exploitation  Committee  of  the  Ter-centennial 
Exposition.  It  was  sent  to  me  as  an  educator,  and  I was  besought 
as  such  to  bring  it  to  the  attention  of  the  children  of  the  public 


278 

schools,  and  as  far  as  I had  any  influence  have  them  consider  the 
educational  value  of  the  Jamestown  display. 

This  prospectus  is  the  little  pamphlet  which  I hold  in  my 
hand,  and  I will  quote  directly  from  it. 

One  of  the  first  paragraphs  brought  to  my  attention  is  the 
one  explaining  the  war  exhibit,  on  which  is  laid  the  greatest  stress. 
It  reads : Twenty  foreign  nations  will  participate  in  this  military 
exhibition  by  sending  war  vessels  from  their  navies  and  crack 
regiments  from  their  armies. 

Now,  of  course,  the  foreign  governments  were  directly 
invited  to  do  these  things,  for  it  involves  such  an  enormous 
expense  that  no  government  would  volunteer  to  send  these 
exhibits. 

We  are  further  told  in  this  prospectus  that  there  is  a war 
museum  maintained  by  the  government  in  connection  with  the 
military  and  naval  display. 

“In  the  war  museum  models  of  fortifications  and  harbor 
defences  and  types  of  batteries  on  embankments  will  be  shown.” 

Furthermore,  there  is  an  exhibit  of  the  ordnance  department, 
which  “will  be  a complete  exhibition  of  firearms  and  powder. 
The  largest  cannon  and  the  smallest  firearms  will  be  shown. 
Various  styles  of  machine  guns  will  be  exhibited.  Cartridge- 
making machines  will  be  operated.  Every  variety  of  automatic 
death-dealing  device  will  be  exhibited,”  etc. 

Again,  what  we  have  known  hitherto  in  the  world’s  fairs 
as  the  “Midway,”  the  “Pike,”  etc.,  will  at  Jamestown  be  known 
as  the  “Warpath,”  thus  further  emphasizing  the  show  as  a military 
one.  To  increase  the  military  attractiveness  of  the  exposition, 
we  are  told  “there  will  be  much  splendid  musical  entertainment 
of  a military  character,  as  the  warships  and  regiments  will  have 
bands  which  will,  of  course,  discourse  war  strains.” 

Thus  in  every  way  and  from  every  side  there  will  be  pre- 
sented to  the  youth  and  children  of  our  land,  who  may  visit  the 
exposition,  the  glory  and  glamour  of  war  and  its  enticing  spec- 
tacular splendors,  and  yet  we  as  educators  are  requested  to  see, 
if  possible,  that  this  symposium  of  war  material  and  “death-deal- 
ing devices”  in  their  highest  exploitation  shall  be  brought  to  the 
attention  of  our  children  in  the  public  schools ! 

I have  with  me  also  a “Report  on  Rifle  Practice  in  the 
Public  Schools.”  Maybe  we  can  influence  this  directly,  although 


279 

I feel  when  I hear  so  much  about  the  influence  of  women  being 
put  to  work  to  carry  out  certain  ideas,  that  as  women  we  cannot 
do  very  much  when  they  tie  us  hand  and  foot  and  then  bid  us 
get  up  and  walk;  so  that  often  we  may  talk  and  talk  until  our 
tongues  are  numb  (applause)  without  either  influence  or  result. 

This  report  I have  referred  to  is  a very  grave  indication  of 
the  insidious  movement  toward  militarism.  It  is  issued  by  the 
authority  of  and  from  a department  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment. It  details  the  work  of  the  National  Committee  that  has 
been  formed  for  the  purpose  of  considering  the  possibility  and 
advisability  of  some  policy  to  inaugurate  a system  of  rifle  practice 
in  the  schools  throughout  the  country.  Our  own  high  schools  are 
now  in  practical  possession  of  such  a system  through  its  sub- 
target gun-machine  practice. 

One  of  the  commissioners  of  this  National  Committee  is  a 
member  of  our  City  Board  of  Education.  He  is  a very  able  man, 
who  has  done  a tremendous  work  for  and  with  the  athletic  work 
in  our  schools. 

There  is  no  question  that  he  deserves  every  credit  and  honor 
that  can  be  given  anyone  who  sees  an  opportunity  to  do  good 
and  puts  that  opportunity  into  practice ; but  he  is,  above  all,  a 
military  man  deeply  interested  in  rifle  practice  and  connected 
with  the  Creedmore  Rifle  Range,  which  has  been  one  of  his  pet 
hobbies  for  many  years. 

Now,  if  there  is  one  thing  more  than  another  that  public 
school  trustees  and  commissioners,  and  the  people  generally,  have 
hitherto  opposed  in  the  schools  it  is  the  introduction  of  any  mili- 
tary tactics  for  the  purpose  of  discipline.  Our  discipline  is,  I 
hope,  and  will  continue  to  be,  founded  on  ethical  principles. 

The  fact  that  the  rifle  practice  is  supported  by  private  con- 
tributions does  not  make  it  any  less  harmful.  This  perversion  of 
educational  ideas  has  so  far  made  its  way  into  our  boys’  high 
schools,  that  each  has  already  a rifle-shooting  club,  with  a sub- 
target gun-machine  installed  by  private  munificence.  There  are 
regular  competitions  between  the  various  clubs,  and  very  hand- 
some tropies  are  awarded  by  various  citizens. 

But  more  than  all  other  encouragement  is  the  promise  of 
the  President  of  the  United  States  to  write  a personal  letter  to 
every  boy  who  has  obtained  a Marksman  Badge  of  a certain 
order. 


28o 


What  stronger  incentive  can  be  given  to  the  boys  to  join 
these  rifle  practice  clubs  whose  membership,  as  yet,  is  purely 
voluntary  ? 

Mark  you,  though,  one  of  the  things  that  is  said  to  induce 
educators  to  introduce  the  system  generally  into  the  schools  in 
our  city  is  that  as  the  boys  play  on  the  streets  and  form  gangs 
for  various  nefarious  purposes,  we,  therefore,  should  give  the 
children  another  idea  which  may  induce  them  to  form  themselves 
into  companies  of  a military  nature ! The  statement  about  gangs 
in  this  report  is  somewhat  misleading,  for  this  gang  tendency 
only  obtains  in  a certain  quarter  of  our  city,  and  the  children 
who  so  fraternize  are  entirely  too  young  for  any  kind  of  rifle 
practice. 

Friends,  these  reports  are  to  be  had  for  the  asking,  and  I 
feel  I can  do  nothing  more  practical  for  our  Peace  work  than  to 
ask  you  to  study  this  report,  using  your  own  intelligence,  and 
ascertain  for  yourselves  if  in  the  concluding  utterances  of  the 
commissioner,  when  he  says  that  at  the  call  of  war  we  will  hava 
7,000  sharp-shooters  from  the  public  schools  ready  to  bear 
arms,  you  do  not  find  a direct  and  unmistakable  military  spirit 
inciting  to  warlike  feeling.  The  brutalizing  effect  of  this  rifle 
practice  in  the  schools,  if  it  becomes  general,  is  only  a question 
of  time;  its  antagonism  to  the  Peace  Cause  is  indisputable. 

Mrs.  Mead. 

I have  allowed  Mrs.  Hastings  to  go  over  time  because  I 
think  she  has  the  most  important  subject  that  is  presented  here 
this  morning. 

I want  to  say  in  regard  to  rifle  shooting  clubs  that  when  the 
Mosely  teachers  were  here  this  winter  I learned  from  them  that 
not  one  free  school  in  England  has  introduced  rifle  shooting. 
I do  not  know  of  any  country  in  the  world  that  taxes  its  people 
to  provide  rifle  practice  for  school  children.  There  are  certain 
endowed  schools  in  England  that  have  adopted  the  methods 
proposed  by  Lord  Roberts,  but  I do  not  know  of  any  country 
in  the  civilized  world  except  ours  in  which  a proposi- 
tion that  the  people  shall  tax  themselves  to  train  their  children 
in  the  art  of  killing  has  been  advanced.  It  has  not  yet  been  done 
by  the  people’s  money  in  the  City  of  New  York.  I think  Mrs. 
Hastings  did  not  explain  that  thus  far  the  cost  has  been  provided 


by  private  subscription,  but  when  it  comes  to  taxing  the  people 
to  do  this  it  will  be  a step  that,  as  I said,  no  other  nation  has 
found  it  necessary  to  take.  It  seems  to  me  if  the  time  ever 
comes  when  our  school  boards  shall  tax  the  people  for  such  a 
purpose  it  will  be  an  indication  of  timidity  and  fear  which  is 
most  discreditable  to  this  great,  strong  country,  which  has  not 
an  enemy  in  the  world.  Up  to  date  we  have  not  been  afraid  of 
any  nation,  and  we  may  well  ask  why  it  is  that  to-day  when  we 
rank  so  high  as  a naval  power  we  should  be  so  alarmed,  whereas 
twenty  years  or  fifty  years  ago,  when  we  had  no  navy  worth 
mentioning,  we  had  no  such  fear  of  foreign  foes? 

I wish  there  was  time  to  say  something  adequate  regarding 
a subject  which  I barely  mentioned  in  my  address  yesterday — a 
subject  to  be  of  immense  importance  in  the  future — namely, 
“Neutralization.”  How  much  anxiety  and  suspicion,  destined 
to  estrange  two  continents,  could  be  avoided  if  we  could  simply 
neutralize  the  Philippines,  as  was  proposed  in  Congress  by  Sena- 
tor Crane,  just  as  Belgium  and  Switzerland  are  neutralized;  this 
should  not  be,  as  in  their  case,  by  the  consent  of  a half  dozen 
nations,  but  by  consent  of  all  the  nations  of  the  world.  If  our 
government  would  petition  all  the  nations  to  neutralize  those 
exposed  and  sensitive  localities  which  would  perhaps  require 
$500,000,000  to  adequately  fortify,  we  could  probably  have  their 
security  guaranteed  by  mutual  consent.  This,  as  a naval  official 
has  said,  would  enable  us  to  reduce  the  navy  of  the  United  States 
one-half.  Please  remember,  ladies,  that  arbitration  is  not  every- 
thing, that  there  are  other  methods  of  providing  substitutes  for 
war  and  for  preventing  the  causes  of  friction. 

We  have  as  our  next  speaker  a lady  who  hardly  needs  an 
introduction  to  an  American  audience.  When  I told  her  the  other 
day  that  it  was  a very  singular  thing  that  every  woman  invited 
to  speak  at  this  Congress  was  a woman  suffragist,  she  replied,  “It 
is  not  strange,  because  every  progressive  woman  nowadays  is  a 
woman  suffragist.”  I have  pleasure  in  presenting  Mrs.  Carrie 
Chapman  Catt. 

American  Leadership 

M'rs.  Carrie  Chapman  Catt 

Madam  President  and  Ladies:  My  understanding  of  the 
object  of  this  meeting  this  morning  is  to  determine  the  ways  and 


28  2 

means  by  which  we  women  may  help  this  great  cause  of  Peace 
and  Arbitration  upon  its  onward  way.  I dare  say  there  is  no 
woman  here  this  morning  who  will  not  entirely  agree  with  me 
when  I say  that  war  is  far  too  barbarous  to  have  any  place  in 
this  Twentieth  Century.  One  of  our  great  papers  has  said  during 
this  Congress  that  even  to  hope  for  Peace  throughout  the  world 
is  impracticable ; but  to  my  mind  the  most  impracticable  method 
of  settling  any  kind  of  dispute  is  by  the  wasteful  process  of  war. 
I believe  that  we  women  who  are  here,  at  least,  have  all  along 
been  of  this  opinion,  and  we  have  -needed  no  great  Peace  Con- 
gress with  its  eloquence  and  its  logic  to  convince  us  of  it.  I 
believe  the  majority  of  the  intelligent  reading  women  of  our 
country  would  believe  this  quite  as  much  as  we ; but  certainly 
it  is  true  that  most  of  our  American  women  do  need  to  read  and 
be  educated  upon  this  subject  to  realize  the  necessity  of  working 
for  this  cause. 

When  the  temperance  advocates  desire  to  make  converts  they 
discover  that  it  is  with  difficulty  that  the  woman  who  has  never 
known  the  shame  and  humiliation  of  drunkenness  in  her  own 
family  can  be  aroused  to  work.  It  is  the  woman  who  knows 
the  horrors  of  drink  who  is  the  earnest  and  devoted  advocate. 
So  when  we  appeal  to  American  women  to  work  for  the  cause  of 
Peace,  we  appeal  to  those  who  know  almost  nothing  of  the  hor- 
rors of  war.  Many  of  us  from  our  earliest  life,  or  even  from  the 
time  we  were  born  until  we  shall  die,  will  never  have  a soldier 
in  our  family,  probably  not  in  our  circle  of  acquaintances;  we 
may  travel  over  the  land  for  days  and  never  see  a soldier.  We 
have  none  of  the  dread  of  war.  Nature  has  made  the  strongest 
possible  fortifications  for  our  nation.  With  the  great  Atlantic 
and  Pacific  Oceans  on  the  East  and  on  the  West,  the  smaller  and 
friendly  nations  to  the  North  and  the  South,  we  know  nothing  of 
the  fear  that  comes  to  the  military  nations  of  the  world.  There 
is  no  dread  of  war  among'  us  and  consequently  we  do  not  realize 
the  necessity  of  Peace.  We  know  nothing  of  the  conditions  upon 
the  other  side  of  the  great  oceans ; there  it  is  very  different. 
Every  little  nation,  and  the  majority  of  the  European  nations 
are  little  nations,  stand,  not  periodically,  in  dread  of  war,  but 
perpetually;  never  free  from  dread,  day  or  night.  Every  one  of 
them  believes  that  perhaps  in  the  future  its  national  life  will  be 
suppressed  by  one  of  the  great  military  nations.  When  Norway 


283 

decided  to  become  a monarchy  and  to  have  a king,  it  did  so  with 
the  explanation  by  its  leading  people  that  it  did  not  dare  to 
become  a republic  lest  Germany  should  not  so  much  respect  its 
military  rights.  And  wise  men  in  Holland  say  that  if  the  present 
Queen  shall  die  without  an  heir,  they  will  gladly  make  their 
country  a republic.  But  they  are  of  the  opinion  that  perhaps 
Germany  will  not  respect  the  military  power  of  the  republic  as  it 
has  the  Dutch  monarchy. 

On  the  other  hand,  Germany,  which  is  to-day  the  dread  of 
all  the  smaller  countries  of  Europe,  has  been  driven  into  militar- 
ism by  the  necessity  of  self-defense.  For  centuries  it  was  over- 
run by  marauding  tribes  until  little  by  little  it  was  forced  to 
unite  and  to  become  a great  military  power.  And  now  all  of 
Europe  stands  armed  to  the  teeth;  England  and  Germany  and 
Russia  and  Turkey,  the  four  great  military  nations,  standing  in 
dread  of  each  other,  and  the  little  nations  standing  in  dread  of 
the  big  ones.  Conscription  enters  into  the  homes  of  all  of  those 
countries  and  takes  out  of  those  homes  the  best  blood  within 
them.  You  cannot  go  anywhere  without  seeing  soldiers;  they 
are  omnipresent.  One  is  made  to  feel  the  moment  he  sets  foot 
upon  European  soil  that  militarism  is  the  basis  of  all  the  laws  and 
institutions. 

You  may  say,  then,  since  Europe  knows  so  well  the  horrors 
of  war  why  does  it  not  arise  and  demand  Peace?  It  is  because 
every  nation  is  distrustful  of  every  other  one,  and  you  may  say, 
why  do  not  women  arise?  Because  European  women  are  not 
free  as  we  are  to  condemn  the  government.  We  can  call  the 
President  of  the  United  States  by  any  name  we  wish,  and  nobody 
cares ; but  in  foreign  lands  let  a woman  attack  the  government, 
let  her  attack  one  of  its  most  favored  institutions,  and  she  finds 
herself  ostracized  in  society ; she  finds  herself  perhaps  even  con- 
demned by  the  suspicion  that  she  has  become  an  ally  of  some 
rival  country.  We  in  America  have  little  appreciation  of  that 
condition. 

It  has  been  said  in  this  Congress  time  and  again  that  it  is 
the  province  of  the  United  States  of  America,  because  it  is  a 
peaceful  nation,  to  take  the  initiative  in  matters  at  The  Hague ; 
and  I say  to  you,  my  sisters,  that  it  is  the  duty  of  American 
women  to  take  the  initiative  in  the  education  of  the  world  among 
women,  because  we  do  live  in  a peaceful  nation  (applause)  ; 


284 

because  we  American  women  are  free  to  work ; because  the  cause 
of  Peace  is  popular  with  us ; nobody  can  be  criticised ; nobody 
can  sacrifice  or  fear  anything  who  stands  for  it.  Foreign  women 
look  to  the  American  women  for  leadership.  They  believe  we 
are  cleverer  than  they.  They  know  we  have  more  freedom  to 
work,  and  they  are  willing  to  follow  the  leadership  of  American 
women,  as  they  are  not  willing  to  follow  the  leadership  of  the 
women  of  any  other  country,  because  their  governments  are  in 
entire  Peace  with  ours,  and  so  I say  to  you  that  it  is  the  duty 
of  American  women  to  stand  as  the  leaders  in  this  great  work 
of  Peace.  Let  each  of  us,  therefore,  become  an  organized  indi- 
vidual peace  society,  and  in  the  church  and  in  the  school  and  in 
the  home,  let  us  stand  for  it  until  we  have  so  aroused  the  public 
reason,  as  Felix  Adler  called  it,  that  the  whole  nation  shall  insist 
that  our  government  must  take  the  initiative  all  along  the  line. 
We  need  to  stand  for  more  than  the  mere  abolition  of  war.  We 
need  to  stand  firm  for  International  Peace,  but  we  need  to  stand 
for  Industrial  Peace  in  order  that  there  shall  be  the  abolition  of 
standing  armies  in  the  future,  and  we  women  can  afford  to  stand 
for  this.  Let  us  demand  its  entire  abolition  in  all  our  education 
and  work.  If  the  50,000  club  women  in  the  one  city  of  New 
York  will  take  it  up,  if  the  women  in  the  churches  will  take  it  up, 
we  shall,  within  two  years,  have  made  such  a sound  in  behalf 
of  the  cause  of  Peace  that  it  shall  be  heard  all  the  way  around 
the  world  and  it  will  become  an  established  fact  before  we  even 
dare  to  dream  of  it.  (Applause.) 

Mrs.  Mead. 

Friends,  this  lady  is  not  on  the  program,  and  she  is  not 
going  to  speak;  but  I want  you  to  know  that  this  is  Fraulein 
Eckstein,  one  of  the  directors  of  the  American  Peace  Society, 
and  a teacher  who  is  this  year  spending  every  spare  cent  of  her 
income  printing  and  mailing  all  over  the  world  these  petitions 
to  the  heads  of  the  nations.  I will  read  this  petition  and  she  will 
be  at  the  rear  of  the  hall  with  other  copies  as  you  go  out,  and, 
if  you  are  willing,  please  take,  each  one  of  you,  a copy  and  get  as 
many  signatures  as  possible,  and  send  to  her;  she  plans  to  go 
herself  to  The  Hague  to  present  the  petitions.  It  is  as  follows. 
(Petition  for  treaty  to  refer  all  difficulties  to  arbitration  read  by 
the  Chairman.)  Ladies,  this  is  one  useful  thing  that  you  can 
easily  do. 


285 

I now  have  great  pleasure  in  presenting  to  you  the  Rev. 
Anna  Howard  Shaw,  President  of  the  National  American 
Woman’s  Suffrage  Association,  and  Chairman  of  the  Committee 
of  the  International  Council  of  Women.  We  had  hoped  to  give 
her  more  time  than  any  other  speaker  and  regret  that  she  also 
must  be  limited  to  ten  minutes. 

Women’s  Responsibility  in  the  Peace  Movement 

Rev.  Anna  Howard  Shaw 

Many  years  ago  a woman  in  our  country  went  forth  to 
battle.  She  armed  herself  with  a hatchet ; she  entered  one  saloon 
after  another,  destroying  the  furniture  and  making  herself  a 
general  nuisance  to  the  community.  One  of  the  New  York  papers 
at  once  wired  Miss  Anthony:  “Telegraph  to  the  paper  your 
opinion  of  the  action  of  this  woman,  and  is  this  what  the  Women 
Suffragists  of  the  United  States  are  after?” 

Miss  Anthony  immediately  replied : “There  are  two  forms  of 
offense  and  defense ; one  is  the  method  of  barbarians ; the  other 
is  the  method  of  civilized  men.  There  are  two  forms  of  weapons 
by  which  we  may  defend  ourselves;  one  is  the  weapon  of  bar- 
barism; the  other  is  the  weapon  of  civilization.  The  hatchet  is 
the  weapon  of  barbarism,  the  ballot  the  weapon  of  civilization.” 
(Applause.) 

The  Association  which  I represent  in  this  Peace  Movement  is 
a Peace  Association,  because  it  stands  for  arbitration;  that  is  all 
that  it  means,  the  right  of  the  people,  the  whole  people,  to  arbi- 
trate their  difficulties  at  the  ballot  box,  and  this  association  has 
demanded  this  form  of  arbitration  from  the  beginning,  in  the 
hands  not  only  of  the  men  but  of  the  women  of  the  nation  as 
well.  When  the  women  of  the  world,  when  the  women  of  the 
United  States  may  stand  as  an  integral  part  of  the  government 
of  the  United  States  and  have  power  to  go  to  the  ballot  box  and 
there  decide  questions  of  Peace  and  war,  then  they  will  have 
power  accompanied  by  that  form  of  responsibility  which  always 
makes  power  safe,  and  the  one  who  holds  it  conservative  in  her 
action. 

We  have  been  told  from  the  very  beginning  of  this  Con- 
gress that  women  have  a tremendous  power  and  force  in  influ- 


286 


encing  war  and  Peace.  They  have,  but  there  is  no  more  danger- 
ous force  in  all  the  world  than  that  exercised  by  a part  of  the 
people  who  have  power  and  yet  who  are  not  held  responsible  for 
the  manner  in  which  they  use  it.  Though  women  have  had  the 
power  to  inspire  war,  to  inspire  what  we  call  patriotism,  which 
makes  men  go  forth  to  battle,  and  though  it  is  the  courage  of 
the  woman  which  incites  to  fight,  yet  the  woman  has  only  the 
influence  to  inspire  that  in  which  man  has  already  taken  the 
initiative.  She  can  inspire  and  encourage  his  action;  she  cannot 
control  the  conditions  before  or  after,  nor  is  she  held  responsible 
for  the  results.  If  we  could  only  add  to  the  influence  of  woman 
the  responsibility  which  would  follow  her  action  in  active  partici- 
pation of  deciding  whether  there  shall  he  Peace  or  war,  then  we 
would  back  up  the  influence  of  women  in  this  country  with  a 
power  which  would  make  her  conservative  and  a mighty  force 
for  Peace.  So  we  stand  in  our  organization  demanding  that 
women  shall  have  the  power  to  sit  in  the  Councils  of  State  and 
bring  into  them  the  woman’s  thought,  the  woman’s  heart,  the 
woman’s  responsibility,  and  when  this  is  done  then  we  will  have 
a real,  practical  force  in  the  women  of  the  country  in  the  inter- 
ests of  Peace;  because  women  will  think  twice  before  they  vote 
their  sons  to  death.  (Applause.)  Women  will  think  twice  before 
they  lay  upon  the  nation  the  terrible  burdens  which  follow  war. 
Women  will  think  twice  before  they  will  be  the  inspiration  of  a, 
in  many  respects,  false  patriotism. 

When  the  Spanish  war  was  on  every  other  household  in  our 
block  hung  out  flags.  We  did  not  hang  out  a single  flag  from 
our  house.  We  were  questioned  in  regard  to  it ; I answered : 
“When  the  war  is  over  we  will  raise  the  flag.”  I believe  the  time 
when  the  flag  should  be  raised,  the  time  when  the  flag  should 
inspire  patriotism,  is  not  in  time  of  war,  but  in  time  of  Peace,  in 
order  that  there  may  be  no  war. 

We  have  a false  idea  of  patriotism  which  has  influenced 
many  of  our  people.  “My  country  right  or  wrong” — how  many 
of  us  heard  that  expression  two  years  ago ! One  man  said : “The 
right  kind  of  patriotism  is  to  stand  by  your  country  under  all 
conditions,  ‘my  country  right  or  wrong.’  ” I said  to  him : “A 
man  who  could  make  such  an  utterance  as  that  has  never  known 
the  first  principles  of  patriotism.”  A real  patriot  says : “My 


287 

country  if  she  is  right,  but  if  she  is  wrong,  then  by  every  power 
of  my  being  will  I seek  to  make  her  right.” 

“I  prefer  my  family  to  myself,  I prefer  my  country  to  my 
family,  but  I prefer  humanity  to  my  family,”  is  the  highest  form 
of  patriotism, — or  that  of  the  Persian  sage,  who  said : ‘‘Think 
not  thou  art  a patriot  when  thou  canst  say,  ‘I  love  my  country 
only/  but  rather  know  that  thou  dost  not  understand  what  patriot- 
ism is  until  thou  canst  say,  ‘I  love  my  kind/  ” 

That  form  of  patriotism  will  never  enter  into  the  hearts  of 
the  people  of  a nation  until  the  mothers  of  the  nation,  the  teach- 
ers of  the  nation  (seven-tenths  of  whom  are  women)  shall  become 
an  integral  part  of  its  life  and  a factor  in  determining  Peace  or 
war,  between  the  nation  in  which  they  may  live  and  the  nations 
beyond  their  portals.  Therefore  I claim  that  if  our  association 
is  not  a Peace  Association  it  is  at  least  a very  close  relation  to 
a Peace  Association,  for  it  is  an  arbitration  society. 

Mrs.  Mead. 

We  have  now  as  our  last  speaker  Miss  Sevasti  N.  Gallisperi, 
representing  the  Department  of  Education  of  Greece.  She  was 
the  first  woman  to  receive  the  degree  of  Bachelor  of  Arts  from 
the  University  of  Athens.  With  the  degree  she  went  to  the  Sor- 
bonne  in  Paris,  taking  the  degree  of  License-es  Lettres,  the 
only  woman  among  127  men  competitors  and  standing  eighteenth 
among  the  thirty-nine  that  succeeded  in  getting  the  degree. 
Upon  her  return  to  Athens  the  Parliament  of  Greece  gave  her 
the  position  of  Inspector  of  Public  Schools  and  this  position  she 
has  held  for  ten  years  without  salary.  She  now  comes  to  this 
country  commissioned  by  the  Minister  of  Education  to  study  our 
educational  methods.  I have  great  pleasure  in  introducing  Miss 
Callisperi. 

I am  very  sorry  that  we  have  not  a half  hour  longer  to  give 
to  all  the  people  who  would  like  to  speak.  I am  specially  sorry 
that  we  have  not  time  to  hear  President  Martha  Gielow  of  the 
Southern  Educational  Association,  who  asks  for  three  minutes, 
but  we  have  not  one  moment  to  spare,  as  the  other  meeting  in 
Carnegie  Hall  opens  in  ten  minutes.  We  must  have,  however, 
one  minute  to  give  Mrs.  May  Wright  Sewall  about  the  James- 
town Exposition. 


288 


The  Symbols  of  Peace 

Miss  Sevaste  N.  Callisperi 

Dear  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : No  words  can  tell  you  how 
thankful  I am  to  God  who  brought  me  to  America,  where  I see 
in  its  best  so  much  of  the  best  that  my  Greek  ancestors  had ; and 
how  grateful  I am  to  my  parents — both  gone — who  by  the  educa- 
tion they  gave  me  are  the  cause  of  the  happiness  I feel  to-day, 
because  I can  address  such  an  audience,  and  because  the  voice 
of  an  Athenian  is  heard  in  the  Tabernacle  Church.  It  seems  to 
me  of  good  omen  that  all  we  American  women  and  foreigners 
meet  in  a church  of  this  name,  being  sure  that  as  the  Laws  of 
Moses  were  kept  in  the  Tabernacle,  so  the  words  that  will  resound 
in  this  Tabernacle  Church,  and  our  oath  to  Peace,  that  we  cer- 
tainly all  give  now,  will  be  faithfully  kept  in  the  Tabernacle  of 
woman’s  heart. 

Looking  on  so  many  calm,  bright  and  intelligent  faces  shin- 
ing with  inner  Peace  in  daily  life,  and  with  the  fervent  desire  to 
bring  Peace  among  the  nations,  we  may  be  proud  to  be  women. 
Now  are  realized  the  worlds  of  Paul: 

“There  is  neither  Jew  nor  Greek;  there  is  neither  bond  nor 
free ; there  is  neither  male  nor  female ; for  ye  are  all  one  in  Christ 
Jesus.” 

Two  great  civilizations  full  of  divine  spirit,  Judaism  in 
which  the  founder  of  our  religion  chose  to  become  incarnate, 
and  Hellenism  through  which  was  extended  all  that  was  good 
in  an  incomparable  measure ; the  one  at  the  restoration  of  nature 
after  the  deluge,  the  other  in  picturing  the  victory  over  warlike 
force,  both  of  those  civilizations  have  chosen  our  sex  to  be 
messengers  of  Peace,  and  both  Minerva  and  the  Dove  brought  to 
humanity  the  same  emblem,  the  olive  leaf,  which  is  characteristic 
of  the  life  which  religion  and  philosophy — that  is  the  experience 
of  centuries — wish  humanity  to  live. 

As  the  wild  bird  that  brought  in  her  mouth  to  Noah’s  Ark 
the  leaf  of  the  olive  tree,  as  a sign  of  the  end  of  the  deluge,  is 
considered  to  belong  to  our  sex,  so  the  Dteity  that  vanquished 
Neptune,  who  had  disputed  with  her  the  possession  of  Attica,  by 
bringing  forth  that  beautiful  and  proud  animal  which  bears  man 
fearlessly  to  the  war,  and  dies  with  him  like  a faithful  friend, 
that  Deity  I say,  who  took  hold  of  its  reins  and  checked  its 


289 

martial  spirit,  has  been  invested  with  the  personality  of  a woman. 
Minerva  was  considered  to  be  the  patron  of  the  naval  arts 
because  she  is  said  to  have  taught  Danaos,  leaving  Egypt,  to 
unfurl  the  sail  and  to  have  surveyed  the  construction  of  the  ship 
Argo.  She  is  represented  on  the  coins  sitting  on  the  prow  of  that 
ship  guiding  its  course.  Though  that  Goddess  was  considered  also 
the  Goddess  of  War  because  she  inspired  the  heroes,  and 
protected  them  with  a calm  and  thoughtful  courage  so  that  they 
might  oppose  the  blind  and  senseless  fury  of  Ares,  the  God  of 
War,  still  she  was  principally  known  as  Minerva  working — 
Athena  Ergani — that  is  the  Deity  who  above  all  presided  over 
all  female  manual  work. 

She  was  the  incomparable  artist  who  wove  and  embroidered 
for  the  Gods  splendid  robes  trimmed  with  admirable  designs. 
But  this  female  deity  was  considered  to  be  connected  with  many 
physical  elements,  and  is  thought  by  those  who  possess  the 
mysteries  of  Sanscrit  to  have  been  the  Goddess  of  the  morning 
and  of  the  lightning. 

Still  this  female  Deity  presided  also  over  the  works  that 
seem  rather  belonging  to  man.  Therefore  she  was  called  too 
Athena  Agrotera,  namely,  Minerva  of  the  Fields. 

In  Thessaly  and  Boeotia,  two  great  and  fertile  parts  of 
Greece,  where  there  are  also  luxuriant  pastures,  she  was  consid- 
ered to  have  taught  men  to  yoke  the  oxen.  So  she  was  the 
Goddess  that  presided  over  agriculture — that  is  the  very  root  of 
life — over  those  works  that  are  most  apt  to  form  the  mildest 
character  and  bring  peace  to  the  soul. 

The  Athenians  attributed  to  her  the  culture  of  the  olive  tree 
in  which  consisted  the  principal  fortune  of  the  Athenian  valley, 
the  fruit  of  which  brings  abundance  to  domestic  life,  gives  that 
liquid  which  is  the  sweetest  and  most  fortifying,  and  which 
lessens  all  pain,  and  the  branch  of  which  is  the  emblem  of  all 
pacific  character. 

So  the  Goddess  of  wisdom  wants  her  followers  to  work — 
she  loves  the  country  and  agricultural  life,  and  is  the  patron  of 
domestic  economy  which  secures  the  honor  and  happiness  of 
life.  And  are  not  these  attributes  of  Minerva  ratified  by  the 
best  examples  of  history?  Is  not  the  return  of  Cincinnatus  to 
his  plow,  the  lesson  that  the  best  leaders  are  those  who  can  limit 


2go 

their  ambition,  and  who,  after  they  have  fulfilled  their  duty, 
know  how  to  leave  the  place  to  others  and  retreat  to  private 
and  honest  and  peaceful  life?  Let  all  women  make  her  attributes 
their  own  attributes  and  inclinations.  This  can  only  be  obtained 
through  education.  “Education  must  bring  to  light  the  ideal  of 
each  individual,”  said  John  Paul  Richter,  and  such  a life  can 
hardly  be  obtained  without  an  education  which  will  enable  each 
child  of  both  sexes  to  discover  and  cultivate  his  own  inclinations 
and  aptitudes,  an  education  equally  divided  between  the  culture 
of  the  heart  and  mind  through  religion  and  philosophy,  the 
scientific  culture  of  the  body  and  the  scientific  study  of  agricul- 
ture in  all  its  branches. 

“I  was  always  of  the  opinion  that  humanity  would  be 
reformed  if  the  education  of  youth  were  reformed,”  wrote 
Leibnitz  to  Placcius. 

We  women  hold  the  world  in  our  hands  because  God  has 
destined  us  to  be  the  educators  of  humanity.  It  is  in  our  hands 
to  give  nobility  to  humanity ; but  we  must  first  imbibe  it  ourselves. 

According  to  the  mythology,  how  was  the  Goddess  Athena 
born?  She  sprang  from  the  head  of  Jove.  Is  not  this  the 
lesson  that  every  young  woman  must  learn,  and  the  principle 
that  must  guide  her  from  the  first  moment  that  she  is  called  tc 
fulfil  the  very  first  duty  of  motherhood?  That  the  being  to 
whom  she  is  to  give  life  must  be  an  intellectual  one,  not  one  of 
mere  flesh  and  blood — that  she  has  to  nourish  the  mind  and 
soul  of  that  being  by  feeding  her  own  mind  and  soul  with  the 
noblest  thoughts  that  knowledge  may  afford,  and  that  she  should 
continue  this  education  even  when  her  children  shall  have  grown 
to  manhood  and  womanhood? 

It  behooves  us  at  this  present  time  to  give  to  our  girls  lofty 
ideals  of  motherhood.  They  must  fit  themselves  to  give  to  the 
world  men  and  women  of  lofty  characters,  of  intellectual 
strength,  governed  by  their  ideals,  not  by  their  passions.  We 
need  to  teach  the  world  that  to  give  to  the  nation  strong, 
upright,  loyal  citizens,  is  more  worthy  of  praise  than  to  engage 
in  the  murderous  pursuits  of  war. 

Education  is  the  great  factor  that  will  change  the  state  of 
humanity.  The  axis  of  that  education  must  be  religion — rational 
religion  with  her  companions,  justice  and  truth,  and  love  of  work. 


29 1 

“It  is  a heaven  upon  earth  where  a man’s  mind  rests  in 
Providence,  moves  in  Charity  and  turns  upon  the  poles  of 
Truth,”  said  Bacon. 

Is  the  cause  of  war  any  other  but  the  ambition  and  insati- 
ability of  the  so-called  great,  under  all  sorts  of  pretexts? 

Let  the  children  and  youth  of  both  sexes  learn  the  beautiful 
lesson  that  is  given  to  us  by  the  aspect  of  the  sheep  feeding  in 
the  fields.  They  are  near  each  other;  they  all  eat  the  grass  of 
the  earth,  but  they  do  not  jostle  each  other.  Is  not  this  picture 
a lesson  that  God  provides  for  all,  and  is  not  that  the  sweetest 
lesson  of  Peace? 

If  we  have  Peace  in  every-day  life  we  will  have  it  among 
nations.  Think  of  the  horror  of  the  white  snow,  which  was 
made  for  the  calm  of  purity,  polluted  with  the  blood  shed  by 
ferocity.  I felt  the  grief  of  this  thing  when  two  years  ago, 
while  inspecting  the  schools  in  Thessaly,  the  snow  lay  three  feet 
thick  upon  the  valleys,  and  the  mountains ; every  roof,  and  every 
twig  upon  the  trees  was  veiled  in  white,  the  sight  brought  calm 
into  my  soul;  then  I could  not  help  thinking  of  the  plains  of 
Manchuria  covered  with  the  same  mantle  of  purity,  but  with  its 
beauty  and  calm  destroyed  by  the  blood  and  mangled  bodies  of 
human  beings.  We  all  know  more  or  less  the  evils  of  war,  and 
we  all  feel  what  the  presence  and  the  sound  of  the  footsteps  of 
our  own  mean  to  us.  How  happy  we  feel  when  we  hear  them. 
Let  us  all  think  what  they  feel  who  see  or  hear  no  more  the 
steps  of  those  who  for  the  ambition  and  rapacity  of  some  are 
gone  forever. 

When  Pericles  the  Great  was  dying  he  was  surrounded  by 
his  friends,  who  were  weeping  and  praising  all  the  great  works 
he  had  done;  he  interrupted  them,  saying:  “You  pass  by  my 
best  deed.  I never  caused  anyone  to  shed  tears.” 

Would  it  be  a small  task  for  women  throughout  the  world 
to  educate  men  so  that  they  might  every  one  of  them  say : “No 
parent  will  be  childless,  no  wife  a widow,  no  child  an  orphan — 
nor  will  any  weep  through  us?” 

Would  it  not  be  a great  thing  if  women  throughout  the 
world  might  be  educated  so  as  to  feel  strongly  in  themselves  and 
inspire  in  men  the  words  of  Antigone:  “I  am  born  and  exist  in 
order  to  love,  not  to  hate.” 


2Q2 

A literature  is  hardly  understood  without  its  own  language. 
There  is  no  literature  so  well  calculated  to  uplift  the  mind  and 
the  heart  of  man  and  woman  as  the  Greek  literature,  because  it 
expresses  the  noblest  of  human  thought  and  feelings,  nor  is  there 
a language  more  divine  or  musical  than  the  Greek  language. 
While  the  young  people  everywhere  spend  so  much  time  learning 
to  tap  on  the  piano,  to  dabble  in  colors,  and  utter  nonsense  in 
different  languages,  schools  make  the  Greek  language  optional. 
Yet  its  strong,  noble  and  delicate  spirit,  along  with  its  harmony, 
has  civilized  humanity  and  might  keep  on  civilizing  it.  I 
express  the  wish  that  it  should  become  compulsory.  Its  power 
may  be  seen  in  the  regeneration  of  modern  Greece,  the  spirit  of 
which  may  be  seen  in  its  emblem,  its  flag,  as  you  all  saw  it 
trimming  most  splendidly  the  hall  of  the  Peace  Congress.  It 
bears  the  most  peaceful  colors ; the  blue  of  the  Greek  sky,  the 
white,  and  on  the  right  top  of  its  stripes  a white  cross,  the 
emblems  of  purity,  strength  and  sacrifice. 

Let  us  be  like  Noah’s  dove  carrying  the  olive  leaf.  It  is 
said  that  the  voice  of  the  People  is  the  voice  of  God;  I say  that 
the  voice  of  a true  woman  is  the  voice  of  God.  There  was  once 
a philosopher  who  had  a small  cottage  behind  which  was  a 
narrow  strip  of  land  with  a single  tree,  and  a bench  under  it. 
Pie  was  always  telling  his  friends  what  a fine,  large  place  he  had 
to  read  and  think  in.  One  of  these  friends  visited  him  one  day 
and  was  astonished  to  behold  only  a humble  cottage  and  instead 
of  a garden  a single  tree.  He  said  nothing,  but  the  philosopher 
understood,  and  pointing  to  the  broad  expanse  of  the  sky,  he 
said,  “All  this  is  mine.” 

I wish,  dear  ladies  and  gentlemen,  that  we  all  might,  like 
that  philosopher,  be  content  with  little ; then  Peace  will  be  on 
earth.  Visit  the  land  of  all  good  and  calm  and  Peace  and  take 
from  the  Valley  of  Athens  a slip  of  the  olive  tree  and  plant  the 
tree  of  Peace  in  your  gardens.  Teach  your  children  under  its 
shadow  the  lesson  of  Peace  and  let  it  be  the  emblem  of  the  tree 
of  Peace  that  will  grow  in  your  hearts. 

Mrs.  May  Wright  Sew  all: 

Mrs.  President  and  Ladies:  I should  have  liked  to  add 
something  to  what  has  been  said  as  a suggestion  of  what  our 


293 

mothers  might  do  in  opposing  the  introduction  of  rifle  practice  in 
our  schools. 

I should  also  have  liked  to  speak  on  the  method  of  inculcat- 
ing the  spirit  of  internationalism  which  necessarily  must  permeate 
the  world.  But  in  the  few  moments  I have  I will  only  tell  you, 
with  the  hope  of  securing  aid  of  all  kinds  from  you,  that  the 
National  Council  of  Women  has  the  interesting  position  of 
hostess  for  the  women  of  the  world  at  the  Jamestown  Exposition 
during  months  of  that  Exposition,  a house  having  been  placed  at 
our  disposal.  The  Chairman  of  the  Committee  in  charge  of  the 
work  which  the  National  Council  of  Women  will  do  is  Mrs.  Kate 
Waller  Barrett.  There  is  also  a board  of  hospitality  for  the 
entertainment  of  the  women  of  other  countries.  I am  a member 
of  her  committee,  and  as  the  Chairman  of  the  Peace  Committee 
of  the  National  Council  of  Women,  and  formerly  President  of 
both  the  National  and  International  Councils,  it  is  thought  that 
we  may  perhaps  form  a link  between  the  women  of  our  own 
country  and  the  women  of  all  other  countries.  I shall  devote 
myself  to  the  concentration  of  efforts  upon  ways  in  which  this 
meeting  at  Jamestown  may  be  made  an  opportunity  for  further- 
ing both  local  and  international  Peace  projects.  I feel  that  just 
the  announcement  of  this  should  give  to  you  some  added  interest 
in  anything  which  you  may  do  in  regard  to  it,  and  it  also  gives 
me  an  opportunity  to  place  this  statement  in  the  printed  volume 
of  the  transactions  of  this  Congress.  It  is  foi  the  women  of 
the  world  (and  when  I say  the  women  of  the  world,  I am  by  no 
means  reflecting  upon  the  men  of  the  world)  to  do  something  for 
Peace  at  the  Jamestown  Exposition,  that  it  may  be  one  of  the 
means  of  cancelling  the  influence  of  the  immense  naval  display 
which  is  being  made  at  the  Exposition  for  the  advancement  of 
the  interests  of  militarism. 

Mrs.  Mead  : 

We  now  have  a very  important  question  and  we  shall  go  as 
rapidly  as  possible  to  the  next  conference. 

At  the  close  of  the  meeting  Mrs.  Gielow  asks  that  there  be 
placed  upon  the  records  a memorandum  that  Mrs.  Martha  Gielow, 
of  Alabama,  a delegate  from  her  association  to  the  Peace  Con- 
gress, brings  this  message,  that  the  removal  of  ignorance  is  the 
first  step  toward  Peace.  Mrs.  Gielow  has  just  returned  from  the 


294 

Educational  Convention  at  Pinehurst,  where  she  represented 
her  association.  Some  of  the  great  educators  who  heard  her 
speech  said  that  the  work  of  this  society  was  destined  to  fill  a 
mighty  part  in  the  advancement  of  the  country.  It  is  entirely 
for  the  up-lift  of  the  illiterate  in  the  rural  districts  of  the  South. 


THE  LIBRARY 
OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


From  Stereograph,  Copyright  1907,  by  Underwood  & Underwood,  New  York. 


Prof.  Hugo  Munsterberg 
Edwin  Ginn 


Archbishop  John  Ireland 
Hon.  John  W.  Foster 


Dr.  William  H.  Maxwell 
Senor  Diego  Mendoza 


295 


CONFERENCE  OF  DELEGATES 

DISCUSSION  OF  THE  REPORT  OF  THE 
COMMITTEE  ON  RESOLUTIONS 
Carnegie  Hall 

Wednesday,  April  Seventeenth,  at  11.30  a.m. 

GEORGE  FOSTER  PEABODY  Presiding 
Mr.  Peabody: 

I am  requested  to  call  to  order  this  meeting  of  delegates 
from  various  organizations  to  the  Peace  Congress. 

Dr.  Trueblood,  of  Boston,  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on 
Resolutions,  will  read  the  resolutions  which  have  been  prepared. 

A time  limit  of  five  minutes  will  be  placed  upon  those  who 
speak  on  the  report.  I think  you  will  all  recognize  how  advan- 
tageous for  you  this  will  be. 

I now  have  pleasure  in  introducing  Dr.  Benjamin  F.  True- 
blood, of  Boston,  Secretary  of  the  American  Peace  Society  (ap- 
plause), who  will  submit  to  you  the  resolutions  which  have  been 
prepared  by  the  committee. 

Dr.  Trueblood: 

Mr.  Chairman  : The  committee  appointed  by  the  Executive 
Committee  of  the  Congress  to  prepare  and  submit  a set  of  reso- 
lutions have  done  their  work  the  best  they  could.  They  have 
labored  under  some  difficulties,  one  being  the  natural  rush  and 
hurry  of  an  occasion  like  this.  Still  greater  difficulties  have  arisen 
from  the  fact  that  several  of  those  who  have  presented  resolu- 
tions have  only  handed  them  in  yesterday  afternoon,  or  this 
morning,  after  the  committee  had  practically  completed  its  work. 
We  have  tried  to  give  respectful  attention  to  all  the  resolutions 
handed  us.  These  resolutions,  so  far  as  not  incorporated  sub- 
stantially in  our  report,  will  be  placed  in  the  hands  of  the  Secre^ 
tary  of  the  Congress  for  whatever  use,  in  the  printed  proceedings, 
that  the  Executive  Committee  may  see  fit  to  make  of  them. 


296 

Let  me  say,  before  reading  the  report  of  the  committee,  that 
we  have  taken  into  account  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  this 
Congress.  We  have  found  it  impossible  to  cover  the  whole  field 
of  peace  propaganda;  there  are  many  subjects  on  which  members 
of  the  committee  as  individuals  would  like  to  have  resolutions 
passed.  But  this  Congress  was  called  by  those  who  originated 
it  specifically  for  the  purpose  of  bringing  American  public  senti- 
ment to  bear  at  the  coming  Hague  Conference,  through  our  dele- 
gates to  that  Conference,  in  order  that  we  may  get  as  much  as 
possible  done  along  practical  lines  this  summer.  The  committee 
has  felt,  therefore,  that  it  was  wise  not  to  attempt,  on  this  occa- 
sion, to  pass  resolutions  upon  many  important  questions  of  peace 
propaganda,  but  to  confine  ourselves  chiefly  to  the  great  subjects 
which  are  to  come  before  the  Hague  Conference,  on  which  we 
expect  to  get,  or  ought  to  get,  favorable  action.  This  body  of 
resolutions  has  been  prepared  with  that  object  in  view,  and  I 
hope  those  who  have  put  in  resolutions  will  not  feel  disappointed 
if  their  propositions  do  not  appear  in  our  report. 

We  have  attempted  to  incorporate  into  the  introduction,  into 
the  Whereases,  what  has  been  done  in  the  eight  years  since  the 
meeting  of  the  first  Hague  Conference,  or,  in  other  words, 
the  present  status  of  our  movement;  and  then  to  connect  with 
this  the  things  that  ought  to  be  done  which  we  expect  will  be  done 
in  part.  This  explanation  I thought  it  was  well  to  make  before 
reading  the  resolutions. 


Resolutions 

Whereas,  The  nations,  through  the  application  of  scientific 
invention  and  discovery  to  intercommunication  and  travel,  have 
become  members  of  one  body,  closely  united  and  inter-dependent, 
with  common  commercial,  industrial,  intellectual,  and  moral  inter- 
ests, and  war  in  any  part  of  the  world  immediately  affects  both 
materially  and  morally  other  parts,  and  undisturbed  peace  has 
become  the  necessary  condition  of  the  prosperity,  well-being,  and 
orderly  progress  of  human  society;  and 

Whereas,  The  Hague  Conference  of  1899  made  a great  and 
unexpected  advance  toward  the  establishment  of  peace,  by  the 
creation  of  a permanent  court  of  arbitration  for  the  judicial  set- 
tlement of  international  disputes ; and 


2Q7 

Whereas , The  said  court  of  arbitration  having  adjusted  four 
controversies,  in  which  nearly  all  the  prominent  powers  were  par- 
ticipants, has  become  a fixed  and  well-recognized  means  of  set- 
tling international  disputes,  though  its  operation  is  only  volun- 
tary; and 

Whereas,  The  principle  of  international  commissions  of 
inquiry,  provided  for  in  the  Hague  Convention,  has  proved  itself 
one  of  great  practical  efficiency,  as  illustrated  in  the  Anglo-Rus- 
sian  North  Sea  crisis ; and 

Whereas,  More  than  forty  treaties  of  obligatory  arbitration 
between  nations,  two  and  two,  have  been  concluded,  stipulating 
reference  to  the  Hague  Court  for  five  years  of  all  disputes  of 
a judicial  order  and  those  arising  in  the  interpretation  of  treaties; 
and 

Whereas,  Public  opinion  in  favor  of  the  pacific  settlement  of 
controversies  has  made  extraordinary  advance  since  the  first 
Hague  Conference,  and,  as  recently  declared  by  the  British  Prime 
Minister,  “has  attained  a practical  potency  and  a moral  authority 
undreamt  of  in  1899” ; and 

Whereas,  The  States  of  the  Western  Hemisphere,  through 
the  action  of  the  Third  Pan-American  Congress  and  the  reor- 
ganization of  the  International  Bureau  of  American  Republics, 
have  reached  what  is  virtually  a permanent  union  destined  hence- 
forth to  wield  a mighty  influence  in  behalf  of  permanent  peace ; 
and 

Whereas,  The  First  Hague  Conference,  though  it  failed  to 
solve  the  question  of  reduction  of  armaments,  for  which  it  was 
primarily  called,  unanimously  recommended  to  the  powers  the 
serious  study  of  the  problem  with  the  view  of  relieving  the 
people  of  the  vast  burdens  imposed  upon  them  by  rivalry  of 
armaments ; 

Resolved,  By  the  National  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress 
held  in  New  York  City,  April  14  to  17,  1907,  composed  of  dele- 
gates from  thirty-five  States,  that  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  be  requested,  through  its  representatives  to  the  Second 
Hague  Conference,  to  urge  upon  that  body  the  formation  of  a 
more  permanent  and  more  comprehensive  International  Union  for 
the  regular  purpose  of  insuring  the  efficient  co-operation  of  the 


298 

nations  in  the  development  and  application  of  international  law 
and  the  maintenance  of  the  peace  of  the  world ; 

Resolved,  That,  to  this  end,  it  is  the  judgment  of  this  Con- 
gress that  the  governments  should  provide  that  the  Hague  Con- 
ference shall  hereafter  be  a permanent  institution,  with  represen- 
tatives from  all  the  nations,  meeting  periodically  for  the  regular 
and  systematic  consideration  of  the  international  problems  con- 
stantly arising  in  the  intercourse  of  the  nations,  and  that  we  invite 
our  government  to  instruct  its  delegates  to  the  coming  Conference 
to  secure,  if  possible,  action  in  this  direction; 

Resolved , That  as  a logical  sequence  of  the  First  Hague 
Conference,  the  Hague  Court  should  be  open  to  all  the  nations 
of  the  world; 

Resolved,  That  a general  treaty  of  arbitration  for  ratification 
by  all  the  nations  should  be  drafted  by  the  coming  Conference, 
providing  for  the  reference  to  the  Hague  Court  of  international 
disputes  which  may  hereafter  arise,  which  cannot  be  adjusted  by 
diplomacy ; 

Resolved,  That  the  Congress  records  its  endorsement  of  the 
resolution  adopted  by  the  Interparliamentary  Union  at  its  Con- 
ference last  July,  that  in  case  of  disputes  arising  between  nations 
which  it  may  not  be  possible  to  embrace  within  the  terms  of  an 
arbitration  convention,  the  disputing  parties  before  resorting  to 
force  shall  always  invoke  the  services  of  an  International  Com- 
mission of  Inquiry,  or  the  mediation  of  one  or  more  friendly 
powers ; 

Resolved,  That  our  government  be  requested  to  urge  upon 
the  coming  Hague  Conference  the  adoption  of  the  proposition, 
long  advocated  by  our  country,  to  extend  to  private  property  at 
sea  the  same  immunity  from  capture  in  war  as  now  shelters  priv- 
ate property  on  land ; 

Resolved,  That  the  time  has  arrived  for  decided  action  toward 
the  limitation  of  the  burdens  of  armaments,  which  have  enor- 
mously increased  since  1899,  and  the  government  of  the  United 
States  is  respectfully  requested  and  urged  to  instruct  its  delegates 
to  the  coming  Hague  Conference  to  support  with  the  full  weight 
of  our  national  influence  the  proposition  of  the  British  Govern- 
ment as  announced  by  the  Prime  Minister,  to  have,  if  possible,  the 
subject  of  armaments  considered  by  the  Conference; 


2Q9 

Resolved,  That  the  Congress  highly  appreciates  the  eminent 
services  of  President  Roosevelt  in  bringing  the  Hague  Court  into 
successful  operation,  in  exercising  his  good  offices  for  restoring 
peace  between  Russia  and  Japan,  in  preventing,  in  co-operation 
with  Mexico,  a threatened  war  in  Central  America,  and  in  initiat- 
ing, at  the  request  of  the  Interparliamentary  Union,  the  assem- 
bling of  a second  International  Peace  Conference  at  The  Hague. 
It  congratulates  him  upon  the  reception  of  the  Nobel  prize  as  a 
just  recognition  of  his  efficient  services  for  peace; 

Resolved,  That  the  distinguished  services  of  the  Hon.  Elihu 
Root,  Secretary  of  State,  to  the  cause  of  International  Peace  and 
good-will,  during  his  recent  visits  to  the  South  American  capitals 
and  to  Canada,  be  accorded  the  grateful  recognition  of  this 
Congress ; 

Resolved,  That  we  thank  the  Prime  Minister  of  Great  Britain, 
Sir  Henry  Campbell-Bannerman,  for  the  noble  stand  which  he 
has  taken  in  favor  of  a settled  policy  of  peace  among  the  nations, 
and  of  a limitation  and  reduction  of  the  military  and  naval  bur- 
dens now  weighing  upon  the  world ; 

Resolved,  That  a copy  of  these  resolutions  be  sent  by  a com- 
mittee of  this  Congress,  to  be  appointed  by  the  President  of  the 
Congress,  to  President  Roosevelt,  to  Secretary  Root,  and  to 
each  of  the  United  States  delegates  to  the  forthcoming  Hague 
Conference. 

I move  that  these  resolutions  be  adopted  as  the  platform  of 
this  Congress. 

Mr.  Peabody:  You  have  heard  the  motion  of  Dr.  True- 
blood  that  the  report  be  adopted  as  the  platform  of  this  Congress. 

A Delegate  : I want  to  second  it. 

Mr.  Peabody  : The  Chair  recognizes  Hon.  Mr.  Bartholdt. 
Mr.  Bartholdt: 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : I shall  occupy 
but  a minute  or  two  in  seconding  these  resolutions,  merely  to  state 
that  the  resolutions  are  almost  identical  with  the  plan  agreed 
upon  by  the  Interparliamentary  Union  for  submission  to  the 
Second  Hague  Conference.  Only  in  one  respect  do  I see  any 
difference,  namely,  in  the  resolutions  as  they  have  been  read,  it  is 
proposed  that  all  disputes  over  international  differences  shall  be 
submitted  to  arbitration,  while  according  to  the  plans  of  the 
Interparliamentary  Union  only  certain  specific  classes  of  disputes 


3oo 

shall  be  referred  to  the  Hague  Court  for  obligatory  arbitration, 
while  in  cases  of  questions  affecting  the  vital  interests  in  any  way, 
or  the  independence  of  a nation,  an  investigation  shall  first  be 
had  before  the  sword  is  drawn ; but  it  is  perfectly  proper,  in  their 
judgment,  for  the  people  to  go  further  than  the  official  represen- 
tatives of  the  people  care  to  go,  and  I welcome,  therefore,  the 
resolutions  because  they  go,  at  least  as  far  as  a number  of  the 
European  States  have  already  gone,  in  the  recognition  of  the 
principle  of  arbitration,  and  in  the  fact  that  in  these  treaties  they 
refer  all  disputes  to  arbitration.  There  is  one  other  demand  which 
the  Interparliamentary  Union  has  incorporated  in  its  platform, 
and  that  is,  that  the  Congress  of  the  United  States,  the  same  as 
all  the  parliaments  of  all  countries,  should  make  an  appropriation 
for  the  purpose  of  Peace  propaganda,  not  an  appropriation  for  a 
certain  percentage  of  the  war  expenditures,  because  that,  in  my 
humble  judgment,  would  seem  impracticable,  but  a direct,  straight 
out,  annual  appropriation  for  the  purpose  of  encouraging  mutual 
visits,  between  the  officials  of  the  different  nations,  and  for  the 
purpose  of  promoting  that  fraternity  and  that  hospitality,  and 
that  knowledge  of  each  other,  which  are  so  essential  to  the  cause 
of  good-will  and  Peace  among  the  nations.  However,  I have 
not  pressed,  as  a member  of  the  Committee  on  Resolutions,  for 
the  insertion  of  this  plank,  for  the  reason  that  it  has  nothing 
really  to  do  with  the  diplomatic  relations  of  the  coming  Hague 
Conference ; that  is  a matter  for  the  people  to  the  several  parlia- 
mentary congresses  to  decide.  At  some  future  time  this  question 
will  surely  be  presented  to  the  peace-loving  people  of  the  United 
States  for  an  expression  of  opinion  as  to  whether  it  is  desirable 
in  view  of  the  millions  that  are  being  appropriated  for  war,  that 
a few  hundred  thousand  dollars  be  annually  appropriated  for  the 
propaganda  of  Peace.  (Great  applause.) 

There  is  only  one  suggestion  I should  like  to  make,  with 
the  permission  of  the  Chairman,  and  the  other  members  of  the 
Committee  on  Resolutions,  that  instead  of  sending  these  resolu- 
tions by  mail  to  the  President  of  the  United  States  and  to  the 
delegates  of  the  Second  Hague  Conference,  that  the  Chairman, 
or  the  President  of  this  great  Congress — Mr.  Andrew  Carnegie — 
be  requested  to  appoint  a committee  for  the  purpose  of  handing 
these  resolutions  personally  to  the  President  of  the  United  States, 
or  personally  to  the  Secretary  of  State,  and  personally  to  every 


301 

one  of  the  delegates  appointed  to  represent  this  Congress  at  The 
Hague. 

Mr.  Peabody: 

I am  sure  the  committee  will  accept  Mr.  Bartholdt’s  sugges- 
tion that  these  resolutions  be  presented  by  a committee  of  this 
Congress,  to  be  named  by  the  President  of  the  Congress. 

(The  amendment  was  accepted  by  the  committee.) 

Mr.  Peabody  : The  Chair  will  now  recognize  Mr. 
MacCracken : 

Chancellor  MacCracken  : 

Mr.  Chairman  : Like  my  predecessor,  I shall  be  very  brief. 
In  connection  with  the  multitude  of  proposed  resolutions,  I was 
reminded  of  an  incident  as  I was  sailing  down  the  St.  Lawrence 
River  upon  a great  steamer.  The  Governor-General  of  Canada 
and  his  household  were  upon  the  deck,  and  we  had  had  a shower ; 
there  was  a beautiful  sky,  and  there  came  out  a resplendent  bride- 
groom with  his  bride  following  him,  and  in  the  presence  of  all 
the  distinguished  company  he  cried  out  to  her:  “Mary,  Mary, 
come  here ; there  are  two  rainbows — one  for  you  and  one  for  me.” 
I,  too,  had  a rainbow  of  my  own  that  I brought  in  my  pocket 
to  the  meeting  of  the  committee,  but  when  I found  that  the 
Chairman  of  the  committee  and  the  members  who  had  done  more 
work  than  I were  all  in  favor  of  confining  our  resolutions  chiefly 
to  matters  that  might  be  expected  to  influence  the  proceedings  of 
the  Conference  at  The  Hague,  I did  not  even  take  my  “rainbow 
resolution”  out  of  my  pocket.  Now,  you  will  see  that  there 
were  seven  members  of  the  committee,  and  you  will  see  there  are 
seven  resolutions,  omitting  the  merely  complimentary  and  the 
resolution  as  to  sending  this  action  to  the  President  of  the 
United  States.  I trust  it  may  be  said  of  this  platform,  as  the 
Book  of  Proverbs  says,  “Wisdom  hath  builded  her  house,  she 
hath  hewn  out  her  seven  pillars.” 

If  I were  compelled  to  make  a choice  among  these  seven 
resolutions,  I should  prefer  a single  one  to  be  adopted,  even 
though  it  cost  the  adoption  of  all  the  rest,  and  that  is  the  second 
resolution.  The  first,  as  you  have  observed,  is  a general  preface 
to  all  the  other  six.  The  second  resolution,  about  which  I want 
to  speak  for  a minute,  is  this : 


302 

“It  is  the  judgment  of  this  Congress  that  the  government 
should  provide  that  the  Hague  Congress  should  hereafter  be  a 
permanent  institution/’  and  so  on.  It  seems  to  me  that  this  is 
the  ideal  action  to  be  taken  at  the  approaching  Conference  of 
Nations.  I feel,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  that  if  the  nations  will 
only  take  this  action  all  the  rest  will,  in  time,  take  care  of  itself. 

To-day  is  a time  of  Peace.  In  a time  of  war  we  cannot 
expect  any  Conference  to  be  assembled  at  The  Hague,  if  it  is  to  be 
left,  as  it  has  been  left  until  now,  to  the  chance  initiative  of  this 
or  that  nation.  You  all  know  that  the  approaching  Conference 
was  recommended  to  be  held  a year  or  two  ago,  but  because  of 
the  existence  of  the  unhappy  conflict  between  Russia  and  Japan, 
it  was  requested  by  the  Czar  of  Russia  that  the  meeting  should 
be  postponed.  Unfortunately,  most  of  modern  history  has  been 
a time  of  war,  and  we  cannot  expect  that  in  a time  of  war  there 
will  be  any  successful  initiation  of  a Conference  at  The  Hague. 

Then,  both  the  first  Conference  at  The  Hague  and  this  second 
Conference  have  been  called  because  of  peculiarly  fortunate  condi- 
tions, and  because  of  exceptional  men.  We  cannot  expect  always 
that  the  world  will  be  stirred  to  action  by  the  Czar  of  the  Russias, 
who  has  been  considered  the  greatest  military  despot  of  the  world, 
asking  us  to  meet,  asking  the  governments  of  the  world  to  meet, 
in  a Conference  of  Peace.  Yet  that  was  the  occasion  of  the  first 
Conference.  We  cannot  expect  always  that  there  will  be  so  young, 
vigorous  and  original  a magistrate  of  the  United  States  as 
our  President,  Theodore  Roosevelt.  (Applause.)  The  fact  that 
he  is  in  an  exceptional  position,  especially  on  account  of  the  part 
he  took  in  reference  to  the  Russian-Japanese  war,  has  very 
largely  made  this  second  Conference  possible. 

Circumstances  like  these  cannot  be  expected  to  occur  again. 
Therefore  at  this  particular  second  meeting,  it  appears  to  me, 
will  come  the  favorable  hour  to  urge,  by  all  the  means  within 
our  power,  that  the  Conference  of  The  Hague  strive  to  make 
itself,  as  our  resolution  says,  a regular  and  permanent  conven- 
tion. (Applause.) 

You  will  observe  that  we  have  Professor  Moore  upon  the 
committee,  and  in  order  to  make  the  resolution  as  emphatic 
as  possible,  though  we  might  have  stopped  by  saying  “a  per- 
manent and  comprehensive  congress  or  union,”  that  we  even 
added  an  adjective  to  what  was  already  superlative,  and  said  “a 


303 

more  comprehensive  and  a more  permanent  parliamentary  union.” 
That  expresses  the  feelings  of  the  seven  members  of  the  com- 
mittee upon  this  subject. 

Now,  there  are  criticisms  “out  of  doors”  that  we  are  seeking 
only  after  “rainbows,”  that  we  are  seeking  for  impossible  ideals, — 
a very  shallow  and  ignorant  criticism.  Those  who  make  such 
criticisms  either  have  not  read  history  or,  having  read  history, 
do  not  think.  Why,  Mr.  Chairman,  the  colonies  were  on  this 
continent  over  one  hundred  years  without  their  having  any- 
thing like  a congress  of  colonies,  excepting  once — when  Connecti- 
cut, Rhode  Island  and  Massachusetts  met  in  a congress  in  order 
to  provide  how  they  could  take  care  of  the  Dutch  down  in 
New  York.  This  was  about  the  year  1640,  when  the  Dutch  were 
still  'here,  and  I may  say  that  the  New  England  Colonies  have 
been  taking  care  of  New  York  and  its  inhabitants  ever  since. 

And  then,  in  1765,  one  hundred  and  forty-two  years  ago, 
there  came  the  first  real  Continental  Congress,  when  a majority 
of  the  colonies  met  right  here  in  the  City  of  New  York  to  con- 
fer and  take  action  with  reference  to  one  subject,  namely,  British 
taxation,  especially  as  embodied  in  the  Stamp  Act.  Observe  that 
this  first  Continental  Congress  did  not  make  the  slightest  pro- 
vision for  meeting  again.  But  the  first  Hague  Conference  did 
make  provision  for  meeting  again,  so  far  as  it  could  be  made 
by  recommendation.  The  first  Continental  Congress  not  only 
made  no  provision  for  meeting  again  but  it  established  no  foun- 
dation. It  did  nothing  but  make  a few  recommendations  to 
the  thirteen  colonies.  Yet  ten  years  later  there  came  the  second 
and  great  Continental  Congress,  and  when  it  came  together,  you 
remember,  it  made  itself  regular  and  permanent,  and  continued 
until  the  foundation  of  our  glorious  constitution. 

Now,  I say  that  the  first  Conference  at  The  Hague  did  far 
more  than  the  first  Continental  Congress,  because  it  not  only 
looked  forward  to  a second  congress,  but  it  also  provided  a per- 
manent tribunal,  which  has  already  done  such  historic  work,  as 
you  have  heard  from  the  chairman  of  our  committee  in  these 
preambles.  And  so  I am  one  of  those  who  look  forward  to  the 
possibility  of  the  second  Hague  Conference,  like  our  second 
Continental  Congress,  making  provision  for  its  own  continuance. 
Let  it  make  such  recommendations  to  the  governments  as  will 
insure  its  continuance  by  a new  treaty.  Thus  will  it  take  a long 


304 

step  in  the  direction  of  the  organization  of  the  governments  of 
the  world  and  the  bringing  about  of  Universal  Peace. 

Samuel  J.  Barrows: 

Mr.  Chairman,,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : I take  great 
pleasure  in  seconding  these  resolutions,  because,  as  Mr.  Bartholdt 
has  said,  they  represent  not  only  his  views  and  my  views,  as 
members  of  the  American  Group  of  the  Interparliamentary  Union, 
but  they  represent  substantially  those  of  the  entire  group  of  that 
organization  in  the  United  States,  composed  of  some  two  hundred 
members,  each  of  them  representing  two  hundred  thousand  con- 
stituents, so  that  forty  million  constituents  are  represented  in 
the  group.  Not  only  that,  but  these  resolutions  represent  sub- 
stantially, with  minor  points  of  difference,  the  ideal,  the  hope, 
the  endeavor  of  the  Interparliamentary  Union  of  the  world,  made 
up  of  two  thousand  members  representing  a majority  of  the  great 
parliamentary  bodies  of  the  civilized  world.  One  more  legislative 
body  will  soon  be  added  to  that  list.  When  the  Hague  Confer- 
ence was  first  formed  there  was  no  parliamentary  body  in  Russia, 
and  that  is  one  reason  why  it  was  called,  for  in  discussing  these 
matters  Russia  had  only  the  resources  of  diplomacy.  But  by  and 
by  we  are  to  have,  if  it  is  not  already  realized,  the  representatives 
of  this  great  nation,  the  people  of  Russia,  in  the  Parliamentary 
Union.  Russia  will  then  find  in  the  existence  of  its  own  parlia- 
ment a new  argument  for  accepting  one  of  these  propositions, 
namely,  that  we  shall  have  a permanent  Hague  Tribunal  and  a 
permanent  periodic  Congress  of  Nations  in  whose  deliberations 
Russia  also  may  be  represented.  The  proposed  periodical  meet- 
ings of  the  Hague  Conference  will  be  a step  toward  that  inter- 
national gathering  or  congress  to  which  we  are  all  looking  for- 
ward. 

Secretary  Root,  in  his  admirable  address,  spoke  of  the  need 
of  taking  the  next  step  from  diplomacy  to  judicial  action.  But 
there  is  also  a third  step  to  be  taken : we  must  have  not  only 
judicial  but  legislative  action.  We  must  have,  not  only  diplomacy, 
not  only  a court;  we  must  have  eventually  and  periodically  a 
Congress  of  Nations  in  which  the  will  of  the  people  may  be  pre- 
sented and  followed.  (Applause.)  The  great  trouble  with  our 
diplomacy  has  been  that  it  has  represented  the  opinions  of  a few 
men.  The  leaders  of  government  have  sent  their  representatives, 


305 

and  by  a good  deal  of  manoeuvring  and  shifting  and  playing  the 
game  of  diplomacy,  they  have  reached  certain  results. 

The  judicial  movement  represented  by  the  Hague  Court  is 
a great  advance  on  that,  because  we  can  present  questions  at 
issue  to  the  judgment  of  a great  tribunal.  But  more  than  that, 
we  are  to  have  our  laws  improved,  we  are  to  have  our  ideas  of 
international  law  codified  and  accepted  by  the  nations  as  the  result 
of  the  intellect,  the  moral  judgment,  the  conscience  of  the  world. 
That  will  come  about  eventually  through  an  organization  in 
which  the  people  of  the  world  shall  be  directly  represented  by 
those  whom  they  choose  to  send.  The  Interparliamentary  Union 
is  a step  in  that  direction.  Mr.  Chairman,  I can  speak,  as  the 
first  speaker  could  not  speak,  of  the  admirable  work  that  has  been 
done  in  developing  the  sentiment  of  the  Interparliamentary  Union, 
by  the  Chairman  of  our  Legislative  Committee — Honorable 
Richard  Bartholdt.  (Applause.) 

Let  me  remind  you  that  it  is  due  to  the  United  States  that 
the  Second  Hague  Conference  is  really  called.  It  was  through 
the  efforts  of  Mr.  Bartholdt  that  the  Interparliamentary  Union 
came  to  the  United  States  in  1904.  It  was  at  St.  Louis  that  the 
resolutions  were  passed  asking  the  President  of  the  United  States 
to  call  the  Second  Hague  Conference.  Those  resolutions  were 
accepted  and  acted  on  by  the  President  of  the  United  States. 
The  resolutions  going  out  from  this  body  will  have  great  influ- 
ence at  The  Hague,  because  the  suggestion  of  the  Second  Confer- 
ence came  from  this  country  and  through  our  President. 

One  word,  Mr.  Chairman,  in  this  report  I like  very  much, 
and  that  is  the  word  “inter-dependent.”  Years  ago  as  a young 
man  I had  the  honorable  duty  in  the  State  Department  of  this 
country  of  being  the  personal  and  official  guardian  of  the  Declara- 
tion of  Independence,  the  paper,  the  parchment,  on  which  it  is 
written,  including  the  original  draft  drawn  by  Thomas  Jefferson, 
with  the  suggestions  by  Benjamin  Franklin.  I considered  it  a 
great  responsibility  and  a great  privilege  to  have  that  in  my  care 
as  one  of  the  officers  of  that  department.  Well,  the  ink  of  the 
Declaration  of  Independence  is  beginning  to  fade  somewhat  now, 
and  they  do  not  show  it  to  the  public.  The  name  of  John  Han- 
cock upon  it, — that  great  big  flourishing  signature  has  faded 
out, — but  I know  that  the  principles  of  that  instrument  have  not 
faded  out.  I find  myself  here  at  this  Congress,  however,  on 


20 


3°6 

the  dawn  of  what  seems  to  be  a greater  and  a nobler  conception. 
I thought  once  that  there  could  not  be  anything  nobler  than  the 
Declaration  of  Independence.  I have  come  to  another  opinion. 
I think  there  can  be.  It  is  represented  in  the  idea  of  the  resolu- 
tions of  this  Congress,  the  declaration  of  the  inter-dependence — 
the  co-dependence  of  the  world.  (Applause.)  We  cannot  live  in 
isolation;  we  must  live  together.  God  made  us  of  one  blood,  all 
the  nations  of  the  world  to  live  together ; live  together  in  peace 
and  happiness;  and  these  resolutions,  Mr.  Chairman,  are  for  the 
purpose  of  furthering  peace. 

We  have  been  accused  of  being  impractical ; we  have  been 
accused  of  being  dreamers ; but  there  is  nothing  impractical  in 
these  resolutions ; and  in  adopting  them  we  may  well  follow  the 
example  of  the  Lake  Mohonk  Conference  for  International  Arbi- 
tration. At  those  conferences,  which  have  been  held  for  more 
than  ten  years,  we  have  always  fired  our  shots  in  the  air  freely, 
but  when  we  came  around  to  adopting  a platform  it  has  always 
been  adopted  with  absolute  unanimity.  So  I hope  that  these  reso- 
lutions will  go  forth  to  the  world  as  the  unanimous  enlightened 
expression  of  the  opinion,  the  ideal,  the  hope  of  this  great  Con- 
gress, believing  as  I do,  that  the  world  is  to  move  forward  in  the 
path  of  practical  idealism  and  to  realize  the  great  ideals  that  these 
resolutions  embody.  (Applause.) 

Mr.  Thomas  Nelson  Page:  I want  to  ask  a question:  I 
understand  Mr.  Moore  is  going  to  speak,  and  as  he  is  the  first 
authority  on  International  Arbitration  and  international  law  and 
everything  that  relates  to  it,  I would  like,  if  proper,  to  introduce 
a very  brief  resolution,  asking  that  the  President  of  this  Congress 
be  empowered  to  appoint  a committee  of  about  fifteen  members 
to  take  into  consideration  the  effecting  of  a permanent  organiza- 
tion for  the  advancement  of  International  Arbitration  through  the 
instrumentality  of  the  Hague  Tribunal,  if  that  will  be  admissible 
now  or  later  on. 

I would  like  to  offer  that  resolution,  and  if  it  is  permissible 
I would  prefer  to  do  it  now,  because  I would  like  to  hear  what 
Mr.  Moore  has  to  say  about  it,  as  whatever  he  might  say  would 
certainly,  and  should  certainly,  I think,  be  adopted  by  this  body 
this  morning. 

Mr.  Peabody:  Is  your  amendment  in  writing? 

Mr.  Page:  Yes.  It  is  a very  brief  one  and  simply  looks  to 


307 

the  appointment  of  a committee  of  say  fifteen  members  on  per- 
manent organization.  I offer  it  simply  because  I find  that  after 
these  conferences  are  over  everything  seems  to  die  down  until 
another  one  is  called. 

Mr.  Peabody:  The  resolution  is  handed  for  the  time  being 
to  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Resolutions. 

The  Chair  has  the  pleasure  of  saying  that  before  the  discus- 
sion is  closed  we  shall  have  the  pleasure  of  listening  to  Mrs.  Mead 
and  Mrs.  Spencer,  as  they  speak  on  the  resolutions.  I also  have 
pleasure  in  saying  that  Hon.  William  Jennings  Bryan  has  con- 
sented to  remain  a few  minutes  to  speak  to  us  later  in  reference 
to  one  particular  clause  embodied  in  our  resolutions  which  has 
great  influence  with  the  Interparliamentary  Union.  We  will  now 
listen  to  Rabbi  Levy. 

Dr.  Levy: 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : It  is  to  me  a 
source  of  great  pleasure  that  I am  privileged  to  raise  my  voice, 
however  humble,  in  support  of  the  resolutions  which  have  been 
presented  for  adoption  this  morning.  I shall  not  limit  myself  to 
any  particular  time,  but  I hope  I shall  be  able  to  add  a fitting 
word  to  this  discussion.  If  I were  to  say  all  that  I might  say  upon 
the  subject,  it  would  take  me  months,  perhaps  years;  but  I will 
try  to  give  you  an  epitome  of  my  feelings  in  a few  minutes. 

These  resolutions  are  to  be  placed  before  you  for  adoption, 
and  I have  no  doubt  that  they  will  receive  your  hearty  assent, 
but  I would  like  to  suggest  that  a copy  of  these  resolutions  as 
adopted  should  be  sent  to  the  clergy  of  all  denominations  in  the 
United  States,  to  the  various  labor  organizations,  to  the  Boards 
of  Education  throughout  the  entire  country.  The  necessity,  as  it 
appears  to  me,  is  to  bring  home  to  the  conscience  of  the  leaders 
of  the  world  of  thought  the  necessity  of  impressing  the  Peace 
sentiment  upon  the  minds  of  the  young  and  the  absolute  necessity 
of  every  man  who  preaches  a gospel  of  religion,  becoming  an 
exponent  of  it  by  word,  thought  and  deed.  The  preacher  who 
undertakes  to  deliver  to  his  congregation  the  message  of  God 
must  be  a man,  when  true  to  the  Gospel,  whether  it  be  of  the 
Old  Testament  or  the  New,  who  is  willing  to  stand  upon  the 
ground  marked  by  these  resolutions  this  morning. 

Whether  I am  crazy  or  whether  I am  civilized,  I do  not 


308 

know,  but  I do  know  that  war  is  murder,  and  to  me  has  come 
the  command,  “Thou  shalt  not  commit  murder.”  This  game 
of  Rouge  et  Noir,  this  game  of  “Red  and  Black,”  the  game  of 
War,  is  red  with  human  blood,  black  with  bestial  hate,  and  every- 
one who  loves  his  race,  everyone  who  reveres  God,  is  pledged 
to  the  spirit  of  these  resolutions,  if  not  to  the  exact  terms. 

Ladies  and  gentlemen,  the  labor  unions  of  this  country  must 
be  appealed  to ; every  man  whose  bread  and  butter  depends  upon 
Peace,  is  a man  who  will  understand  the  potent  argument  of 
financial  necessities ; and  the  educators  of  the  country,  through  the 
boards  of  education,  must  begin  to  teach  our  little  children  that 
to  use  a pistol  or  a gun  or  fire  a cannon,  except  in  self-defense, 
is  contradictory  to  the  spirit  of  the  great  Prophets  of  Israel  who 
gave  us  our  sacred  Holy  Scriptures,  and  contrary  to  the  spirit 
of  the  gentle  Nazarene  to  whom  the  New  Testament  has  been 
dedicated.  (Applause.)  In  other  words,  ladies  and  gentlemen, 
we  must  force  home  the  truth  that  it  is  altogether  too  customary 
for  men  to  serve  God  with  their  lips  and  deny  him  with  their 
lives.  Whereunto  serves  the  purpose  of  speaking  of  the  Prince 
of  Peace  when  the  flags  of  the  world  borne  on  the  battleships 
of  the  world,  carry  the  very  cross  which  is  sacred  to  His  memory  ? 
Whereunto  serves  this  great  Gospel  of  a religion  of  Peace  when, 
in  the  name  of  that  very  religion  war  is  continued  throughout 
the  world  ? If  we  are  honest,  if  we  are  sincere,  if  we  mean  what 
we  say  in  our  churches  week  after  week,  these  resolutions  will 
find  practical  enforcement  by  the  Hague  Conference  and  the 
spirit  of  Peace  will  prevail. 

I am  reminded  of  the  story  of  a little  boy  who  received  a 
quarter  from  a friend.  He  reported  this  fact  to  his  mother  when 
he  came  home,  and  she  asked,  “Did  you  say  thank  you  to  the 
gentleman?”  And  the  boy  answered  nothing.  Again  said  the 
mother,  “Did  you  say  thank  you  to  the  gentleman?”  and  again 
the  boy  said  nothing.  Again  said  the  mother,  “Did  you  say 
thank  you  to  the  gentleman?  If  you  don’t  answer  me  I will  whip 
the  life  out  of  you.”  The  little  boy  answered  nothing.  The 
mother  laid  him  across  her  knee,  turned  him  wrong  side  up, 
and  applied  her  gentle  hand  to  his  tender  flesh.  Then  she  asked 
again,  “Did  you  say  thank  you  to  the  gentleman?”  This  time 
he  answered : “Mother,  I said  thank  you,  but  the  gentleman  said 
‘Don’t  mention  it.’  ” 


309 

Men  tell  us  that  we  can  never  succeed,  they  tell  us  that  this 
movement  must  fail ; I say  to  you,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  that  that 
argument  has  been  addressed  to  every  movement  looking  to  the 
uplift  of  the  human  race.  When  Moses  took  his  slaves  out  of 
Egypt,  when  he  determined  to  build  his  people  into  a nation, 
they  said  to  him,  “It  could  not  be,”  and  yet  the  pyramids  are 
breaking  away  and  Israel  still  lives.  When  the  Nazarene  was 
placed  upon  the  cross  and  from  His  lips  came  the  expression, 
“Father  forgive  them,  they  know  not  what  they  do,”  they  said 
to  His  followers,  who  were  a handful,  “The  spirit  can  never 
prevail.  This  Man  of  Sorrows  can  never  become  an  inspiration 
to  the  race.”  There  are  three  hundred  and  forty-eight  millions 
of  people  who  to-day  revere  Jesus  of  Nazareth  as  the  Master. 

When,  at  that  memorable  meeting,  just  referred  to  by  Chan- 
cellor McCracken,  the  Declaration  of  Independence  was  drawn 
up,  many  were  the  sneers  and  interruptions  of  those  who  said, 
“The  spirit  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence  can  never  pre- 
vail.” There  are,  thank  God,  ninety  millions  of  free  people  to-day 
who  have  been  reared  under  the  spirit  of  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence, and  to-day  we  are  free.  Tell  me  of  any  great  move- 
ment that  has  helped  the  world  which,  after  one  hundred  years, 
has  stood  more  solid,  appealed  more  strongly  to  the  conscience 
of  humanity  than  this  Peace  Movement  which  has  caused  us  to 
assemble  to-day? 

Ladies  and  gentlemen,  let  me,  as  a last  word,  say  to  you: 
“Fail ! it  is  the  word  of  cowards.  Fail ! it  is  the  word  of  slaves.” 

Mr.  Peabody: 

The  Chair  will  recognize  two  speakers  from  the  floor,  and 
then,  as  he  believes  all  will  wish  to  hear  him,  he  will  call  on  the 
Hon.  William  Jennings  Bryan. 

Mrs.  Lockwood: 

Mr.  President,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : I only  wish  to 
speak  a word  and  not  one  of  dissonance,  I hope,  from  the  general 
proposition  touching  the  instructions  to  the  Hague  Conference. 
I represent  the  International  Peace  Bureau,  and  to  some  extent 
the  Branch  Bureau  in  Washington  of  the  Woman’s  National 
Press  Association.  I simply  want  to  give  the  message  that  I am 
instructed  by  the  Press  Association  to  give.  This  is  the 


3io 

message ; first,  that  all  nations  on  friendly  terms  with 
each  other  that  shall  be  represented  in  the  international 

court  at  The  Hague — I must  call  it  a court  and  not  by 

any  other  name — shall  be  urged  to  enter  into  formal  treaties 
of  arbitration  in  order  that  the  Peace  of  the  future  shall 

be  assured.  Second,  that  no  single  nation  has  any  longer  the 
right  to  break  the  Peace  of  the  world.  Mr.  Chairman,  I feel  that 
that  ought  to  be  in  the  general  resolutions,  that  no  single  nation 
shall  ever  hereafter  have  the  right  to  break  the  Peace  of  the  world. 
(Applause.)  Third,  that  they  use  their  instrumentality  to  incor- 
porate as  one  of  the  principles  of  international  law  that  in 

case  of  war  the  right  of  all  neutrals  on  sea  or  land  shall  be 
respected,  in  their  persons  and  property,  and  that  no  seaport 
town,  even  of  belligerents,  shall  be  bombarded  while  it  endangers 
the  lives  of  women  and  children  (applause),  as  it  always  does; 
I think  that  would  be  the  end  of  war.  Fourth,  that  there  should 
be  a general  and  gradual  disarmament  until  the  armaments  are 
reduced  to  a reasonable  police  force,  like  that  of  Switzerland  and 
Belgium,  both  in  the  interests  of  Peace  and  with  a view  to  reliev- 
ing the  laboring  classes  from  the  support  of  so  many  non-pro- 
ducers. Fifth,  that  the  principles  of  Peace  shall  be  taught  in  all 
institutions  of  learning  of  all  nations,  supported  by  money  of  the 
government.  Sixth,  that  the  meeting  of  the  Hague  Court  shall 
be  permanent  and  that  this  Court  shall  always  be  open  for  the 
transaction  of  business.  It  was  suggested  in  the  resolutions  that 
it  be  open  to  all  the  nations  of  the  world,  but  if  it  really  is  an 
international  court,  it  must  be  open  to  all  the  nations  of  the 
world,  whether  they  have  signed  the  protocol  or  not.  Isn’t  our 
national  Supreme  Court  open  to  everybody  in  the  United  States? 
This  International  Court,  then,  must  be  open  to  all  the  nations 
of  the  world,  whether  they  subscribe  to  it  or  not.  Now,  Mr. 
Chairman,  I believe  that  these  suggestions  are  not  in  discord 
with  the  resolutions  presented  by  the  committee,  but  that  they 
are  in  accord,  as  I wish  them  to  be  in  accord,  for  it  is  only  by 
agreement  with  each  other  that  we  shall  have  any  hope  of 
success. 

Mr.  Francis  Gallagher:  I offer  the  following  resolution: 

Resolved , That  we  recognize,  with  great  appreciation,  the 
valuable  services  rendered  in  behalf  of  the  cause  by  Mr.  Andrew 
Carnegie. 


3H 

The  Chairman: 

If  Mr.  Gallagher  will  kindly  withdraw  that  resolution,  a 
resolution  has  been  adopted  covering  services.  We  had  better 
get  the  body  of  the  resolutions  constituting  our  Platform  disposed 
of  and  then  we  will  have  plenty  of  time  to  thank  everybody. 
Mr.  Murphy  follows. 

Judge  Murphy: 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : I must  plead 
guilty  to  being  one  of  the  delegates  who  called  upon  the  chair- 
man of  the  Committee  on  Resolutions  this  morning,  but  I did  not 
know  that  the  committee  had  already  held  its  meeting,  or  I should 
have  certainly  called  there  before.  I was  very  courteously 
received  by  him,  and  the  resolutions  which  I had  intended  to 
offer  I shall  not  insist  upon,  unless  the  committee  deems  it  advis- 
able to  embody  its  substance  in  the  resolutions  which  it  has  pro- 
posed. 

Now,  I am  heartily  in  favor  of  the  resolutions  that  have 
been  presented  by  this  committee,  particularly  that  one  which  is 
in  favor  of  making  the  court  a permanent  institution,  but  I 
believe  that  to  make  the  court  an  effective  court  we  must  dele- 
gate to  it  some  power  which  shall  become  inherent  and  which  no 
nation  can  take  from  it.  We  have  the  right  to  delegate  to  it  the 
power  which  I have  in  mind.  I believe  that  it  should  be  the  duty 
of  that  court  not  only  to  arbitrate  the  differences  that  may  be 
submitted  to  it,  but  in  case  one  nation  should  declare  war  upon 
another,  it  should  be  the  duty,  the  power  of  that  court  to  inves- 
tigate immediately  and  inquire  into  the  merits  of  the  claims  of 
the  contending  nations  and  publish  its  findings  to  the  world. 
(Applause.)  I believe  that  any  nation  desirous  of  going  to  war 
would,  in  such  a case,  hesitate  if  it  knew  that  its  claims  were  to 
be  judicially  determined  and  that  there  was  a chance  of  going 
up  against  the  opinion  of  the  world.  (Applause.)  It  may  be 
asked,  what  good  might  be  accomplished  by  such  an  action,  after 
hostilities  had  begun?  To  that  I say  that  the  nation  whose  cause 
is  just,  who  is  fighting  because  it  is  compelled  to  fight,  should 
have  the  sympathy  of  the  peace-loving  people  of  the  wTorld. 
(Applause.)  We  should  know,  if  we  can,  in  such  cases,  when  a 
nation  is  in  the  right.  There  are  many  ways  in  which  the  nation 
that  is  just,  whose  cause  is  just,  might  be  aided  by  the  peace- 


312 

loving  people  of  the  world  without  affecting  the  laws  of  neutrality. 
I should  like  to  see  some  such  clause  embodied  in  the  resolu- 
tions. 

Mr.  Peabody: 

I have  the  pleasure  of  presenting  to  the  delegates  Hon. 
William  Jennings  Bryan,  of  Nebraska. 

Mr.  Bryan: 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : There  are  so  many  delegates  who 
have  not  had  an  opportunity  to  express  themselves  upon  these 
questions  and  it  is  so  important  that  those  who  have  taken  the 
trouble  to  come  here,— many  of  them  traveling  hundreds  of  miles, 
— it  is  so  important  that  they  shall  have  part  in  these  proceedings, 
that  is  is  hardly  fair  that  we,  who  have  been  assigned  places  on 
the  program  should  take  the  time  that  might  otherwise  be  given 
to  the  public  in  full  discussion  of  these  questions.  And  then,  too, 
I am  aware  of  this  fact,  that  each  one  looking  at  the  question 
from  his  own  standpoint  may  present  a thought  that  is  entirely 
new,  and  that  may  be  very  useful  even  to  those  who  are  prom- 
inent in  the  work  and  have  given  great  consideration  to  the  sub- 
ject, believing  as  I do  that  “Everybody  knows  better  than  any- 
body,” and  believing  that  we  can  gain  wisdom  from  all  who 
earnestly  desire  to  advance'  this  movement,  I am  only  going  to 
occupy  your  time  for  a moment  this  morning  and  leave  the  rest 
of  the  forenoon  to  others,  for  I have  ample  opportunity  this  after- 
noon and  twice  to-night  to  say  what  I have  to  say  to  you.  I have 
not  had  the  opportunity  to  look  over  all  of  these  resolutions.  I 
came  here  this  morning  especially  to  see  that  one  idea  which  I 
regard  as  important  is  included  in  the  resolutions,  and  that  is, 
that  where  questions  not  included  in  arbitration  treaties  arise, 
instead  of  being  a cause  of  war,  should  be  submitted  for  impartial 
investigation  at  the  hands  of  an  International  Tribunal  in  order 
that  cause  for  war  may  be  removed.  This  resolution  I want  to 
discuss  this  afternoon  more  at  length.  It  was  adopted  by  unani- 
mous vote  in  the  Interparliamentary  Union  last  July  in  London, 
when  twenty-six  great  nations  were  represented,  and  I was  glad 
this  morning  when  I came  here  to  find  that  the  spirit  of  this 
resolution  has  been  included  by  the  committee  in  the  resolutions 
that  have  been  presented  here,  and  I am  sure  that  will  be  the 


313 

unanimous  sentiment  of  the  delegates  here,  that  we  should  take 
this  step  now,  for  I regard  it  as  a long  step  in  the  direction  of  the 
elimination  of  war  among  the  nations. 

The  only  other  thought  that  I wish  to  present  is  this : I 
believe  that  the  resolutions  do  not  include  a provision  that  money 
should  be  considered  just  as  war  vessels  and  ammunition  are. 
I believe  that  the  time  has  come  when  we  should  express  it  as  the 
opinion  of  those  who  are  assembled  here  that  the  loaning  of 
money  by  a neutral  nation  should  be  regarded  as  being  as  objec- 
tionable as  furnishing  powder  and  shell  (applause)  ; for  with 
what  consistency  can  we  say  that  a neutral  nation  shall  not  fur- 
nish powder  or  lead  or  munitions  of  war,  and  then  say  that  the 
money-lenders  of  that  nation  may  furnish  the  money  with  which 
to  buy  the  things  that  are  prohibited.  There  are  very  few  people 
in  a country  who  would  want  to  loan  this  money,  and  I am  not 
willing,  for  my  part,  that  the  interest  of  the  great  majority  of  the 
people  shall  be  sacrificed  that  a few  money-lenders  in  any  coun- 
try may  be  able  to  profit  by  the  distress  of  nations.  (Applause.) 
In  time  of  war  these  loans  draw  a higher  rate  of  interest  and 
there  the  money-lender  is  able  to  take  advantage  of  the  necessity 
of  nations  forced  to  borrow,  and  while  it  may  be  very  profitable 
to  the  money-loaners  of  the  different  nations  to  thus  carry  on 
war  and  make  profit,  I think  the  people  who  have  no  pecuniary 
interest  to  serve  by  such  transactions  and  have  a moral  purpose 
to  advance,  can  find  it  to  their  advantage  to  express  that  moral 
purpose  in  the  resolutions  of  this  body.  (Applause.) 

Mr.  Dutton  : 

It  is  now  ten  minutes  to  twelve,  and  I move  that  at  half- 
past twelve  a vote  be  taken  on  the  resolutions  presented  by  the 
committee. 

The  motion  was  adopted. 

Mr.  A.  H.  Love: 

Mr.  Chairman,  and  Good  Friends  All:  You  cannot  be 
surprised  that  I commend  most  heartily  the  resolutions  that  have 
been  presented;  that  I commend  the  New  York  Peace  Society  for 
its  tremendous  advance  over  what  was  possible  here  in  1868,  when 
we  met  in  Dodsworth  Hall  with  the  same  principles,  and  yet  could 
not  muster  one  hundred  and  fifty  people. 


3H 

I think  every  good  thing  may  be  made  a little  better.  For 
instance,  you  speak  of  the  treaties  of  arbitration  between  the 
countries.  But  sincerity  and  faithfulness  in  carrying  out  these 
treaties  are  essential  to  the  preservation  of  Peace  and  the  pre- 
vention of  war.  The  original  rescript  calling  for  the  first  Hague 
Conference  should  be  reaffirmed  and  adhered  to.  There  are 
principles  in  that  which  must  not  be  overlooked.  Strict  neutrality, 
as  was  said  by  the  last  speaker,  should  be  preserved  when  nations 
are  on  the  eve  of  war  or  engaged  in  war,  so  that  no  support  may 
be  given  to  either  side  in  any  form  whatsoever,  and  that  vessels 
and  other  property  of  neutrals  shall  not  be  subject  to  seizure.  A 
portion  of  this  has,  I find,  been  expressed  in  the  resolutions ; but 
the  part  that  Mr.  Bryan  has  referred  to  I very  heartily  endorse. 
In  our  own  city,  at  Cramp’s  shipyard,  vessels  were  fitted  out 
during  the  war  and  afterward  turned  against  us,  as  in  Turkey, 
when  we  wished  to  collect  a debt,  though  the  vessels  had  been 
built  in  Philadelphia. 

Again,  no  effort  should  be  made  to  collect  alleged  debts 
against  any  country  by  force,  but  all  such  claims  should  be 
carried  to  the  Hague  Court.  Mr.  Hay  said  to  me  in  his  own 
mansion  at  Washington  a short  time  before  his  death,  “Never 
will  I uphold  the  collection  of  alleged  debts  by  deadly  force.” 

The  Hague  Court  of  which  you  have  spoken  should  be 
permanent,  and  its  decisions  final. 

Again,  I believe  that  every  effort  should  be  made  by  the 
coming  Hague  Conference  to  remove  the  causes  of  war,  so  that 
the  principles  of  justice,  humanity,  and  the  general  welfare  shall 
be  more  and  more  recognized.  In  that  way  armies  will  finally 
be  reduced,  and  navies  will  be  driven  to  the  point  of  ceasing,  if 
justice  is  at  the  bottom  of  all  international  negotiations. 

One  last  thought.  I have  wished  for  a better  word  than 
limitation — limitation  is  good,  but  there  is  a better  word  after 
that,  namely,  reduction,  for  when  we  limit,  if  we  do  limit,  we  still 
give  some  countenance  to  war.  Therefore  let  us  see  that  an 
appropriate  reduction  both  of  the  army  and  of  the  navy  be 
recommended,  and  some  plan  adopted  for  its  carrying  out  in 
good  faith  by  each  nation. 

Mrs.  Lucia  Ames  Mead:  Mr.  Chairman:  It  is  a signifi- 
cant fact  that  at  Chicago,  last  month,  at  the  annual  meeting  of 
the  State  and  City  Superintendents  of  Schools  of  the  United 


315 

States,  where  twelve  hundred  and  fifty  educators  were  gathered 
together,  they  passed  unanimously  a resolution  recommending 
that  on  the  eighteenth  of  May — the  anniversary  of  the  opening 
of  the  Hague  Conference — there  should  be  given  instruction  to 
the  children  of  the  Public  Schools  on  the  significance  of 
that  day. 

It  is  also  a noteworthy  fact,  that  in  December,  in  Minne- 
apolis, the  American  Federation  of  Labor  passed  resolutions 
which  cover  four-fifths  of  those  which  are  presented  to  you 
to-day,  and  are  endorsed  by  the  Interparliamentary  Union,  and 
that  three  thousand  local  trade  unions  were  requested  to  send  to 
President  Roosevelt  their  approval  of  these  resolutions. 

I wish  to  say,  that  so  far  as  I represent  the  National  Council 
of  Women  and  the  National  Woman’s  Suffrage  Association,  I 
believe  that  we  stand  together  solidly  for  the  principles  embodied 
in  these  resolutions. 

The  first  Hague  Conference  discussed  the  most  difficult 
question — limitation  of  armaments — which  is,  we  trust,  to  come 
up  at  the  second  Hague  Conference.  They  made  a mess  of  it, 
for  they  began  at  the  wrong  end  of  the  problem.  They  began 
balancing  battleships  with  battleships,  and  cruisers  with  cruisers, 
and  tonnage  with  tonnage,  and  got  into  a hopeless  mathematical 
snarl.  President  Roosevelt,  though  he  speaks  in  a conservative 
and  cautious  way,  nevertheless  seems  to  think  that  limitation  of 
armaments  may  be  brought  about  at  the  second  Hague  Confer- 
ence, and  suggests  that  it  may  be  done  by  lessening  the  size  of 
ships.  Most  of  the  Englishmen  who  have  carefully  considered 
the  problem  think  it  should  be  done  by  limitation  of  war  budgets 
for  the  next  five  years,  making  them  not  to  exceed  that  of  the 
last  five  years.  I thank  Mr.  Stead  for  emphasizing  the  fact  the 
other  day  that  limitation  of  armaments  is  not  disarmament.  All 
we  ask  is  a little  halt, — a truce, — until  we  can  get  our  breath 
and  think.  We  don’t  expect  to  accomplish  everything  at  the 
next  Hague  Conference : four-fifths  of  what  we  here  ask  may 
possibly  be  endorsed  there. 

The  chief  doubt  seems  to  be  as  to  the  possibility  of  getting 
the  limitation  of  armaments.  It  largely  depends  upon  the  public 
sentiment  of  our  people  as  to  whether  our  government  shall 
extend  a strong  and  helpful  hand  to  England,  whose  Premier  is 
leading  the  world  in  this  forward  movement.  If  we,  who  have 


3i6 

not  an  enemy  in  the  world,  are  in  this  great  opportunity 
suspicious  and  timid  or  apathetic,  we  shall  not  deserve  the  place 
among  the  nations  that  we  now  claim. 

Judge  Chamberlain: 

M!r.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : I am  commis- 
sioned by  the  State  Board  of  Trade  of  Massachusetts  to  present 
to  this  body  a resolution,  but  before  I read  it,  I must  read 
another  resolution  passed  by  that  board  June  17,  1905,  that  you 
may  fully  understand  it: 

“Resolved,  That  in  the  judgment  of  the  Massachusetts  State 
Board  of  Trade  the  time  has  come  when,  by  treaty,  neutral  zones 
should  be  established  from  the  ports  of  North  America  to  the 
ports  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  and  the  continent  of  Europe, 
within  which  zones  vessels  shall  be  free  to  pass  without 
invasion.” 

I move  the  following  resolution : 

“ Resolved , That  the  neutralization  of  trade  routes  of  the 
ocean  as  proposed  by  the  Massachusetts  State  Board  of  Trade, 
June  17,  1905,  incorporated  into  the  platform  of  the  twelfth 
annual  meeting  of  the  Mohonk  Conference  on  International 
Arbitration,  June,  1906,  adopted  at  the  fifteenth  universal  Peace 
Congress  held  in  Milan,  Italy,  September,  1906,  favorably  consid- 
ered at  a session  of  the  International  Congress  of  the  Chamber 
of  Commerce  in  Milan  in  September,  1906,  referred  to  a 
committee  for  study  of  the  Twenty-third  Conference  of  the 
International  Law  Association,  held  in  Berlin,  October,  1906, 
and  unanimously  adopted  as  a part  of  its  memorial  to  the  Presi- 
dent at  the  present  session  of  the  Legislature  of  the  Common- 
wealth of  Massachusetts,  be  approved  by  this  Congress  as  in  the 
interest  of  the  Peace  Movement  and  worthy  of  the  consideration 
of  the  governments  of  the  world,  and  the  consideration  of  the 
coming  Hague  Conference.” 

Very  briefly,  Mr.  Chairman  and  Gentlemen,  we  must  move 
along  several  lines  if  we  expect  ultimately  to  reach  the  stand- 
point of  Peace.  We  are  doing  magnificent  work  along  the  lines 
of  various  questions  that  may  be  a cause  of  war  and  also  of 
reducing  the  cause  of  war. 


317 

This  proposition  involves  the  limitation  of  the  area  of  a 
possible  war.  History  has  told  us  that  neutrality  is  one  of  the 
greatest  steps  toward  Peace.  The  Massachusetts  State  Board  of 
Trade  has  considered  that,  and  is  presenting  these  resolutions  as 
business  men.  They  find  it  in  the  neutralization  of  Switzerland, 
Belgium  and  Luxemburg;  they  find  it  in  the  neutralization 
which  was  guaranteed  by  the  Congress  of  the  State  of  New 
York  in  1840;  incorporated  in  1837. 

It  also  finds  expression  virtually  in  the  neutralization  of  the 
Great  Lakes  and  the  St.  Lawrence  River  separating  Canada  from 
the  United  States. 

It  has  been  invoked  in  the  Suez  Canal  and  is  to  be  applied 
in  our  own  Panama  Canal.  The  State  Board  of  Trade  simpl> 
asks  that  this  question  may  be  submitted  with  your  approval. 

There  are  two  more  principles  which  it  invokes ; that  is,  the 
initiative  intercourse  which  must  be  had  between  two  nations, 
between  all  nations,  which  is  the  basis  of  diplomatic  relations. 

The  other  is,  that  the  whole  ocean  is  the  common  property 
of  everybody ; everybody  has  the  right  to  use  the  ocean ; and  no 
nation,  no  two  belligerent  nations,  have  the  right  to  bring  their 
trouble  and  their  strife  into  that  great  route  so  that  trade  is 
interfered  with.  We  say  these  great  routes,  which  are  as  clearly 
defined  as  the  banks  of  a river,  shall  be  neutralized  by  all  the 
nations  of  the  world. 

Mr.  Magill:  Mr.  Chairman:  William  Randall  Cremer,  I 
am  sure,  will  be  known  by  a large  portion  of  this  audience,  for 
he  has  done  more  to  promote  the  Interparliamentary  Union  than 
any  other  living  man.  He  said  that  when  we  formed  a 
Supreme  Court  we  went  a great  way  toward  the  promotion  of 
Universal  Peace;  that  when  our  different  states  came  under  one 
Supreme  Court,  that  was  a very  long  step  toward  Permanent 
Peace.  What  we  want  is  a Supreme  Court  of  the  World.  We 
don’t  want  a Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  merely,  but 
we  want  it  to  have  the  same  relation  exactly,  the  same  powers, 
toward  the  nations,  that  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States 
has  in  our  states.  The  Supreme  Court  had  been  established  two 
years  and  six  months  before  it  got  a case.  Why?  People  would 
not  trust  it.  Each  state  wanted  its  own  court  and  would  not 
appeal  to  the  Supreme  Court.  But  after  two  years  and  six 
months  it  got  its  first  case.  Now  cases  go  from  the  lower 


318 

court  to  the  higher  court  of  the  state,  and  then  to  the  Supreme 
Court,  and  they  are  understood  to  be  absolutely  settled  by  the 
decision  of  the  Supreme  Court. 

What  we  want  to-day  is  a Supreme  Court  of  the  world,  and 
we  want  it  to  be  in  continuous  session.  We  want  every  nation 
represented  there  and  all  cases  considered  where  one  party  feels 
itself  dishonored.  The  Court  should  have  supreme  power  among 
all  the  nations,  or  in  other  words  it  should  be  a permanent 
Supreme  Court  of  the  nations,  and  that  should  be  distinctly 
stated  in  some  way  in  these  resolutions. 

Mrs.  Anna  Garlin  Spencer:  We  have  so  much  other 
business  besides  resolutions  that  I will  add  but  a word  to  Mrs. 
Mead’s  talk.  Mr.  Chairman,  so  far  as  the  moral  and  the  intel- 
lectual initiative  of  woman  is  concerned  and  has  the  power  of 
expression,  it  desires  just  as  much  Peace  here  and  now  as  it 
can  get.  It  is  incumbent  upon  the  statesmen,  the  jurists,  and  the 
students  of  international  law  to  work  out  the  next  steps.  We 
are  trying  to  make  the  rising  generation  such  men  and  women 
as  will  not  only  carry  out  these  resolutions,  but  whose  influence 
will  extend  far  beyond  the  horizon  of  the  Peace  in  sight  to  that 
universal  fraternity  in  which  men  shall  understand  that  he  alone 
is  successful  who  is  working  with  and  not  against  the  forces  that 
draw  the  ages  on  toward  universal  brotherhood. 

Mr.  Trueblood:  Mr.  Bryan  has  proposed  a slight  change 
in  the  wording  of  one  of  the  resolutions,  which  the  committee  is 
glad  to  accept.  It  will  then  read : “ Resolved , that  the  Congress 
records  its  endorsement  of  the  resolution  adopted  by  the  Inter- 
parliamentary Union  last  July,  urging  that  in  case  of  disputes, 
etc.”  The  rest  of  the  resolution  will  remain  as  it  was  read. 

(The  proposed  change  was  approved.) 

Mr.  S.  L.  Hartman,  speaking  on  the  resolution  which 
recommended  the  exemption  of  private  property  at  sea  from 
capture  in  time  of  war,  suggested  that  a small  international  fleet 
of  cruisers  might  be  created  which  would  afford  ample  protec- 
tion to  commerce  and  save  the  expense  of  the  great  national 
fleets. 

Mr.  J.  C.  Clayton  : I rise  to  support  the  resolutions, 
although  I am  one  of  several  who  submitted  to  the  com- 
mittee resolutions  that  were  not  adopted.  I prepared  and 
submitted  to  the  committee  a ten-page  draft  of  a constitu- 


319 

tion  for  the  United  States  of  the  World,  covering  the  whole 
thing.  The  committee,  in  their  wisdom  (and  I now  agree 
with  them  upon  that  point),  said  that  the  authority  of  this 
Congress  was  not  adequate  to  take  into  consideration  such  a 
proposition.  I still  believe  that  ultimately  the  wisdom  of  the 
suggestions  in  that  tentative  constitution  will  come  to  be 
admitted,  some  time  when  the  people  are  ripe  for  it ; that  a consti- 
tution of  the  United  Nations  of  the  World,  combining  a legisla- 
tive, an  executive  and  a judicial  department,  will  be  adopted ; 
and  I believe  that  when  that  action  shall  be  reached, — it  may  be 
fifty  or  sixty  years  hence, — it  will  be  found  to  have  no  little 
resemblance  to  the  paper  which  I had  the  presumption  to  submit 
to  the  committee.  I cordially  support  the  resolutions  as  presented 
by  the  committee. 

Mr.  Trueblood:  As  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Reso- 
lutions I think  we  ought  now  to  vote  on  this  body  of  resolutions, 
with  the  two  or  three  verbal  changes  which  we  have  made  to 
meet  the  suggestions  which  have  been  offered.  Then  other 
resolutions  may  be  taken  up. 

Possibly  the  Congress  can  adopt  something  in  simple  form 
that  will  meet  the  wishes  of  the  Massachusetts  State  Board  of 
Trade.  Their  proposal  to  neutralize  the  trade  routes  of  the 
ocean  was  before  the  committee,  but  we  did  not  formulate  any 
resolution  on  the  subject.  The  committee  think  they  can  present 
a subsequent  resolution  that  will  meet  the  wishes  of  Judge 
Chamberlain  and  the  Board  of  Trade. 

Mr.  Peabody:  The  question  now  is  upon  the  adoption  of 
the  resolutions  as  submitted  by  the  committee,  with  the  amend- 
ments suggested. 

A Delegate:  Read  the  resolutions  without  the  whereases. 
(Cries  of  “No”  and  “Vote.”) 

Mr.  Peabody:  The  delegates  do  not  desire  to  have  them 
read.  May  the  Chair  say  that  the  delegates  present  should  carry 
with  them  the  thought  that  they  are  under  obligations  to  see 
that  these  resolutions  mean  something  to  the  bodies  from  which 
they  are  delegated,  that  they  may  aid  in  the  creation  of  a public 
opinion  which  will  truly  represent  the  people  of  the  United 
States.  (Applause.) 

(The  resolutions  were  unanimously  adopted.) 


320 

Mr.  Trueblood:  I should  like  in  behalf  of  the  committee 
to  present  the  following  resolution,  which  covers  the  matter 
presented  by  Judge  Chamberlain  from  the  Massachusetts  State 
Board  of  Trade.  It  does  not  express  approval  of  the  proposition, 
but  only  asks  that  it  may  be  considered  at  The  Hague. 

Resolved,  That  this  Congress  requests  the  coming  Hague 
Conference  to  consider  the  proposition  of  the  Massachusetts 
State  Board  of  Trade,  which  has  been  approved  by  the  Massa- 
chusetts Legislature,  the  M'ohonk  Conference  on  International 
Arbitration,  the  Universal  Peace  Congress,  and  other  bodies,  to 
neutralize  the  trade  routes  of  the  ocean. 

(The  resolution  was  unanimously  approved.) 

Mr.  Marks  : Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen : 
While  I fully  appreciate  the  good  that  comes  out  of  such  a 
meeting  as  we  have  been  having,  expressing  the  sentiment  of 
people,  crystallizing  it  and  strengthening  it,  I feel  that  a great 
deal  depends  upon  our  action  after  we  leave  the  hall  this  after- 
noon. I have  been  representing  the  Committee  on  Commerce 
and  Industry,  and  as  such  I feel  that  unless  we  back  up  what 
we  say  by  what  we  do,  we  shall  not  accomplish  much.  Dollars 
have  been  called  the  sinews  of  trade,  and  I propose  that  dollars 
shall  be  made  the  sinews  of  Peace.  A million  dollars  spent  by 
us  in  the  cause  of  Peace  will  certainly  save  ten  million  dollars 
spent  in  the  cause  of  war,  and  a business  man  would  consider 
that  a good  proposition. 

I have  a resolution  to  present  here  toward  carrying  out  this 
suggestion,  which,  if  I am  right  in  the  assumption  that  every 
dollar  spent  for  Peace  saves  ten  to  be  spent  in  the  cause  of  war, 
will  save,  if  put  into  effect,  every  poor  man  and  every  rich  man 
something  every  day  in  his  expenses,  if  he  drinks  tea,  or  if  he 
eats  or  drinks  other  things.  This  is  the  resolution : 

Resolved,  That  this  Congress  authorizes  the  appointment  of 
the  following  named  trustees,  who  shall  have  power  to  add  to 
their  number,  to  collect  funds  for  the  promotion  of  International 
Peace,  and  to  disperse  such  funds  in  their  discretion  through 
existing  or  new  agencies : 

Andrew  Carnegie,  Seth  Low, 

George  Foster  Peabody,  Robert  Treat  Paine,  of  Boston, 

James  Speyer,  Joshua  L.  Baily,  of  Philadelphia, 


321 

and  trustees  from  Chicago,  Pittsburgh,  the  South,  the  Pacific 
Coast  and  such  other  sections  as  they  may  decide. 

(The  resolution  was  adopted.) 

Mr.  Trueblood:  Something  has  been  said  here  about  the 
creation  of  a National  Peace  Organization.  May  I say  for  the 
benefit  of  a number  of  persons  that  there  is  already  in  existence 
and  has  been  for  many  years  a National  Peace  Organization,  the 
American  Peace  Society  with  its  office  in  Boston.  This  society 
has  a considerable  permanent  fund,  which  it  is  perfectly  willing 
to  have  increased  to  a million  dollars.  Membership  is  open  to 
everybody,  in  every  state  in  the  Union;  the  society  has  in  fact 
members  in  nearly  every  state.  This  organization  initiated  the 
call  for  this  Congress.  It  has  a monthly  organ,  the  Advocate  of 
Peace,  and  possesses  all  the  qualities  that  could  be  given  to  any 
new  organization.  It  already  has  a national  standing  and  I hope 
that  all  new  comers  in  the  movement  will  acquaint  themselves 
with  its  history  and  its  work. 

Mr.  Peabody:  The  chair  has  the  pleasure  of  presenting 
Mrs.  Robert  Abbe,  who  will  offer  one  of  the  most  important 
matters  that  we  have  to  consider,  the  matter  of  a children’s 
league. 

Mrs.  Abbe:  I think  all  the  people  who  attended  the  Young 
People’s  Meeting  yesterday  afternoon  will  bear  me  out  in  the 
statement  that  there  was  more  enthusiasm  there  than  we  have 
seen  at  any  other  meeting.  We  know  that  this  work  will  event- 
ually fall  into  the  hands  of  the  children  of  to-day.  I therefore 
move  that  this  body  approve  the  resolution  proposed  at  the 
Young  People’s  Meeting  of  this  Congress  yesterday  afternoon 
by  Professor  Charles  Sprague  Smith  for  the  establishment  of  a 
Children’s  League,  for  the  promotion  of  International  Peace,  and 
that  the  following  committee  be  appointed,  with  power  to  add  to 
its  number,  to  carry  this  resolution  into  effect: 

Charles  Sprague  Smith,  Chairman, 

Nathan  C.  Schaeffer,  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction 
in  Pennsylvania. 

Robert  Erskine  Ely. 

Edwin  D.  Mead  of  Boston. 

George  H.  Martin,  Secretary  of  the  State  Board  of  Educa- 
tion of  Massachusetts. 


21 


322 

Dr.  William  H.  Maxwell,  Superintendent  of  Schools,  New 
York. 

Miss  Clara  B.  Spence. 

Miss  Mary  J.  Pierson. 

Mrs.  Anna  Garlin  Spencer. 

Miss  Grace  H.  Dodge. 

Mrs.  Robert  Abbe. 

(The  motion  was  adopted.) 

Mrs.  Mead:  This  is  the  first  National  Congress  we  have 
held.  In  organizing  the  first  National  Congress  we  were  sure 
that  it  would  be  the  beginning  of  a series  and  we  did  not  reckon 
without  our  host.  Some  invitations  have  already  come  in;  one 
from  Chicago,  with  a definite  assurance  that  $25,000  would  be 
raised  there  to  meet  the  expenses  of  this  Congress  if  we  will 
come  to  Chicago  next  time;  we  have  an  invitation  from  the 
Pacific  Coast,  of  which  you  will  hear  more  later. 

I am  Chairman  of  the  Committee  that  met  yesterday  to 
consider  this  matter,  with  representatives  from  Cincinnati, 
Chicago,  Madison,  Wis.,  New  York,  Boston,  Philadelphia,  and 
we  unanimously  came  to  this  recommendation,  and  I submit  this 
as  a resolution  to  you.  I must  say  at  the  beginning  that  the 
executive  committee  of  this  Congress  consisted  of  fifteen  mem- 
bers, men  and  women,  of  whom  eight  were  placed  in  New  York, 
in  order  to  give  definiteness  to  the  work  here,  and  seven  members 
of  the  committee  representing  other  cities.  I move  that  the 
committee  be  authorized  at  their  discretion  to  fix  the  date  and 
place  of  the  next  National  Peace  Congress,  and  then  to  call  a 
conference,  as  was  done  with  reference  to  the  organization  of 
this  Congress,  to  call  representatives  from  all  the  peace  organi- 
zations of  the  country,  and  to  appoint  an  executive  committee  to 
arrange  for  the  details  of  the  second  Congress.  I offer  this  as 
a resolution. 

Mr.  Peabody:  You  have  heard  the  resolution  of  Mrs. 
Mead,  which  has  been  seconded.  All  in  favor  of  the  adoption 
of  this  resolution  signify  it  by  saying  “Aye.”  Contrary  minded, 
“No.”  It  is  carried.  The  Chair  will  recognize  Thomas  Nelson 
Page  of  Virginia. 

Mr.  Page  : The  resolution  which  I now  wish  to  offer  has  been 
submitted  to  a number  of  gentlemen  here  who  represent  various 


323 

organizations,  and  I understand  it  has  been  made  acceptable  to 
them  all.  I have  changed  the  number  from  fifteen  to  ten. 

“Resolved,  That  a Committee,  not  to  exceed  ten,  be  appointed 
by  the  President  of  this  Congress,  to  confer  with  the  permanent 
Executive  Committee,  with  the  Committee  of  which  Mr.  John 
W.  Foster  is  Chairman,  for  the  purpose  of  considering  measures 
for  the  advancement  of  International  Arbitration  especially 
through  the  instrumentality  of  the  International  Court  at  The 
Hague.” 

I do  not  feel  it  necessary  to  speak  on  the  resolution  at  all, 
and  I will  just  submit  it. 

Mr.  Moore  : I second  the  resolution.  This  is  a resolution 
of  a practical  kind.  We  adopt  general  resolutions  here,  setting 
forth  what  we  consider  should  be  accomplished.  Then  it  is 
necessary  that  somebody  should  take  up  the  particular  things  and 
give  them  practical  form,  and  devise  or  suggest  measures  by 
which  they  may  be  carried  out.  That  is  the  object  of  this  reso- 
lution. 

(The  resolution  was  approved.) 

Dr.  Richards:  I would  like  to  have  a congress  where 
those  questions  of  Mr.  Trueblood’s  might  be  discussed  and  where 
everyone  might  bring  out  points;  amongst  the  hundreds,  there 
might  be  one  or  two  good  points  that  we  could  make  use  of.  I 
think  that  at  a National  Congress  there  ought  not  to  be  given 
only  two  hours  and  a half  to  people  who  have  devoted  their  lives 
to  the  work  of  Peace  and  know  all  the  ins  and  outs  of  it.  There 
should  be  a congress  for  two  or  three  days  to  talk  about  other 
questions.  What  we  have  heard  here  to-day  and  what  we  have 
heard  all  these  other  days  is,  after  all,  only  a very  small  part 
of  what  we  have  to  do  and  ought  to  do.  I offer  the  following 
resolution : 

“Resolved,  That  Mr.  Trueblood,  Mrs.  Spencer,  and  Mr. 
Love  be  appointed  a committee,  with  power  to  appoint  others  to 
co-operate  with  them,  to  consider  the  forming  of  a permanent 
national  federation  of  organizations  interested  in  the  cause  of 
Peace  and  Arbitration.” 

Let  me  say  one  other  word.  I have  a message  to  you  from 
Germany,  and  in  spite  of  everything  that  has  been  said  I can 
assure  you  that  if  you  go  to  Germany,  you  will  come  in  contact 


324 

with  a peaceable  people.  I can  assure  you  that  you  will  see 
that  the  German  people  do  not  spend  all  their  money  on  soldiers, 
but  you  will  see  that  every  day  in  Germany  they  are  paying  out 
a million  and  a half  of  marks  to  the  widows  and  orphans  of 
workmen  and  to  sick  workmen  who  cannot  work,  and  even  to 
those  who  are  convalescing  but  are  not  able  to  go  to  work  right 
away.  Why  don’t  you  take  up  those  things  and  not  talk  about 
soldiers  all  the  time?  I shall  not  talk  about  it  here — I have  no 
time.  I hope  there  will  be  a day  when  I shall  have  opportunity 
to  say  to  you  a few  words  about  militarism  in  Germany,  and  I 
hope  you  know  that  I am  with  you  heart  and  soul  for  Peace 
forever.  As  Prof.  Miinsterberg  says,  if  you  want  to  talk  to 
Germans  and  if  you  want  them  to  listen  to  you,  you  must  know 
these  things.  You  cannot  argue  with  people,  if  you  don’t  know 
what  you  are  up  against.  Now  the  people  of  Germany  fifty 
years  ago  were  so  poor  that,  for  instance,  Prof.  Bunsen  (you  all 
know  the  Bunsen  burner;  you  know  perhaps  that  if  it  was  not 
for  the  Bunsen  burner  there  would  not  be  so  many  millions  in 
the  iron  works  to-day),  who  was  one  of  the  greatest  men  that 
ever  lived,  was  so  poor  that  he  had  to  smoke  potato  leaves 
instead  of  tobacco.  That  was  only  fifty  years  ago,  and  to-day 
Germany,  with  all  its  military  burden,  is  a wealthy  country,  and 
German  professors  can  travel  all  over  the  world  and  come  to 
America  and  tell  you  a few  things.  Now,  you  cannot  make 
people  who  do  not  go  deep  into  things,  as  we  do,  believe  that 
militarism  is  a great  burden.  There  are  good  arguments  against 
militarism,  which  I should  like  to  give  if  there  were  time. 

There  is  coming  a great  Peace  Congress  at  Munich  this  fall, 
and  I have  been  asked  by  the  official  who  has  charge  of  the 
arrangements  to  give  you  the  sympathy  of  the  friends  of  Peace 
in  Germany.  After  what  has  happened  in  this  country,  you  must 
help  these  friends  of  Peace.  Things  have  been  said  here  which 
will  make  it  very  much  harder  work  for  them.  You  Americans 
should  go  down  to  the  President  and  ask  for  a warship  to  carry 
you  over  to  the  Peace  Congress,  that  you  may  show  the  German 
people  that  you  want  to  live  in  Peace  with  all  nations,  as  you 
really  do. 

And  now  I want  to  call  your  attention  to  the  motion  I have 
made.  We  ought  to  take  some  steps  to  form  a permanent 
organization  of  peace  societies  and  peace  workers,  such  people  as 


325 

are  not  exactly  in  the  peace  societies  but  are  with  us  heart  and 
soul  and  are  interested  in  other  great  societies  which  are  willing 
to  join  in  this  movement. 

Mr.  Peabody  : You  have  heard  the  resolution 

Mr.  Trueblood:  I see  no  objection  to  the  resolution,  if 
you  will  add  to  it  the  words,  “if  it  is  deemed  desirable,  in  their 
judgment.” 

Mr.  Peabody  : I will  put  the  motion  with  that  understanding. 

(The  resolution  was  adopted.) 

Mr.  Peabody  : Mr.  Pugsley,  representing  the  Harvard 
students,  desires  to  speak  in  reference  to  intercollegiate  work. 

Mr.  Pugsley:  I am  not  a graduate  of  Harvard,  but  I am 
a member  of  the  National  Intercollegiate  Peace  Committee,  com- 
posed of  under-graduates  from  the  colleges  and  universities  of 
the  country,  which  was  formed  at  Columbia  University  yesterday. 
I desire  to  make  a motion  that  a committee  be  appointed  from 
this  Congress  to  co-operate  with  the  general  students’  committee 
with  a view  to  establishing  peace  societies  in  the  various  colleges 
and  universities  in  the  land  and  interesting  college  men  in  the 
Peace  Movement. 

Dr.  Richards:  This  resolution  has  been  in  substance 
already  placed  before  the  Committee  on  Resolutions  by  the 
committee  on  peace  propaganda  of  the  colleges  and  universities 
of  New  York  City,  so  you  will  not  be  astonished  if  I speak  in 
support  of  the  motion.  I am  myself  secretary  of  that  committee 
and  we  have  in  preparation  a circular  to  go  to  all  the  colleges 
and  universities  in  the  country,  as  we  have  circularized  all  the 
twenty-five  institutions  in  Greater  New  York  that  give  degrees, 
to  form  this  local  committee,  and  if  the  Congress  will  give  us 
the  support  of  a resolution,  we  will  be  very  thankful  and  our 
work  will  be  more  effective. 

Mr.  Peabody:  The  Chair  suggests  that  the  appointment 
of  this  committee  be  referred  to  the  Executive  Committee  of 
which  Prof.  Dutton  is  Chairman. 

Mr.  Pugsley  : The  resolution  reduced  to  writing  reads  as 
follows : “Resolved,  that  a committee  be  appointed  from  this 
Congress  by  the  Executive  Committee  to  co-operate  with  the 
General  Students’  Committee  with  a view  of  establishing  peace 
societies  in  the  colleges  and  universities  of  the  country  and 
interesting  college  men  in  the  peace  movement.” 


326 

Rev.  Anna  Shaw  : May  I make  an  amendment  that  in 
place  of  the  words  “college  men”  be  substituted  the  words  “college 
students.” 

Mr.  Peabody:  The  amendment  is  accepted. 

Prof.  Dutton  : I offer  the  amendment  to  add  “and  pro- 
fessors.” 

Dr.  Trueblood:  There  is  an  Intercollegiate  Peace  Asso- 
ciation already  established ; it  was  established  two  years  ago  this 
spring  at  Goshen  College,  Indiana.  Last  year  it  held  a confer- 
ence at  Earlham  College,  Richmond,  Indiana.  This  year  it  is  to 
hold,  on  the  17th  and  18th  of  May,  its  third  conference  at  the 
University  of  Cincinnati.  The  Intercollegiate  Peace  Conference 
is  especially  intended  for  professors  in  those  institutions,  and  it 
now  embraces  more  than  thirty  of  the  Middle  West  colleges. 
This  movement  among  the  students  for  a students’  organization 
is  intended  to  complete  the  work  in  the  colleges  and  get  the 
whole  college  body  interested  in  the  movement.  So  I do  not 
quite  see  the  necessity  of  putting  in  the  words,  “and  professors.” 
We  have  a well-organized  association  for  them  now,  and  the 
students  will  probably  work  better  without  them. 

(Prof.  Dutton  withdrew  his  amendment,  and  the  resolution 
as  amended  by  Rev.  Anna  Shaw  was  adopted. 

(The  meeting  then  adjourned.) 


THE  LIBRARY 
OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


From  Stereograph,  Copyright  1907,  by  Underwood  & Underwood.  New  York. 


327 


NINTH  SESSION 

THE  LEGISLATIVE  AND  JUDICIAL 
ASPECTS  OF  THE  PEACE  MOVEMENT 
Carnegie  Hall 

Wednesday  Afternoon,  April  17th,  at  3 

HON.  SETH  LOW  Presiding 


Mr.  Low  : 

If  this  meeting  will  be  kind  enough  to  come  to  order  I will 
ask  its  attention  to  a very  interesting  incident  that  has  just  been 
placed  upon  the  program. 

There  is  to  be  the  presentation  of  a resolution  adopted  by 
the  Daughters  of  the  American  Revolution  in  favor  of  arbitra- 
tion, and  the  presentation  of  a Peace  Flag  voted  by  the  Daughters 
of  the  American  Revolution  to  Mr.  Carnegie  in  appreciation  of 
his  services  in  the  cause  of  Peace.  Mr.  Carnegie  is  here  to 
receive  the  resolution,  and  Mrs.  Helen  Beach  Tillotson  and 
Captain  Richmond  Hobson  will  present  the  flag.  (Applause.) 

Mr.  Hobson: 

Mr.  President,  and  Delegates  of  the  National  Arbi- 
tration and  Peace  Congress  : We  are  come  as  a committee 
from  the  National  Society  of  the  Daughters  of  the  American 
Revolution,  now  in  congress  assembled 'in  the  city  of  Washing- 
ton, D.  C.,  to  bring  this  resolution : 

“The  women  of  the  land  are  jealous  of  the  nation’s  patriot- 
ism ; they  claim  for  their  country  the  leadership  in  every  great  and 
noble  cause,  and  they  will  teach  the  nation’s  children  to  be  as 
valiant  and  as  effective  in  the  cause  of  Peace  as  their  forefathers 
were  in  the  cause  of  liberty  (applause),  to  the  end  that  our  flag 
and  our  nation  may  stand  forever  before  the  world,  not  only  as 
the  guardians  of  liberty,  but  as  the  sponsors  of  Peace.” 

Mr.  Carnegie — In  the  name  of  the  National  Society  of  the 
Daughters  of  the  American  Revolution,  now  in  congress  assem- 


328 

bled  in  the  city  of  Washington,  we  present  to  you  the  beautiful 
flag  of  peace  now  floating  over  this  great  congress,  in  token  of 
their  affectionate  appreciation  of  the  great  and  beautiful  work 
and  labor  of  love  that  you  have  done  and  are  doing  in  the  holy 
cause  of  Universal  Peace. 

Mr.  Carnegie: 

Captain  Hobson,  Mrs.  Tillotson,  Ladies  and  Gentle- 
men : This  is  a time  of  surprises  for  me.  I said  in  Pittsburg 
I was  in  a dream.  Yesterday  afternoon  I went  to  the  Engineer- 
ing Building  and  opened  that;  to-day,  an  hour  ago,  I was 
informed  of  this  last  and  sweetest  honor,  which  was  to  be  con- 
ferred upon  me.  Truly,  I bear  my  blushing  honors  thick  upon 
me  these  days.  (Applause.)  Unfortunately,  they  are  far 
beyond  any  merit  of  mine,  so  that  I can  only  attribute  them  to 
the  love  and  enthusiasm  of  people  who  recognize  even  the  small- 
est service  in  causes  which  are  so  precious  and  so  dear  to  them. 
I look  at  that  flag,  Mir.  Hobson  and  Mrs.  Tillotson,  and  I see 
forty-four  stars  there  united  in  one  country,  over  the  whole  of 
which  there  floats1  the  Holy  Spirit  of  Peace.  I look  to  Europe 
and  I see  forty-five  countries,  but  what  do  I find  there?  Hatred, 
suspicion,  animosity ! Why  ? Because  we  are  under  the  Holy 
Spirit  of  Peace,  and  they  under  the  Savage  God  of  War.  We 
furnish  examples  to  Europe  now.  We  furnish  one  on  the  North, 
for  Canada  has  two  little  yachts  on  the  inland  seas,  and  they 
never  fire  a shot  except  in  congratulation  to  the  two  little  yachts 
belonging  to  the  United  States,  which  breathe  Peace  and  Good- 
will from  the  mouth  of  their  cannon. 

The  second  example  we  show  Europe  is  this : On  the  South 
of  us  we  have  Mexico,  and  our  President,  the  greatest  peace- 
maker living — remember  no  man  holds  Theodore  Roosevelt 
higher  than  I do  as  a Maker  of  Peace — induced  Mexico  to  unite 
with  him  and  jointly  they  intimated  to  the  South  American 
Republics  that  they  must  keep  the  Peace,  and  they  did  so.  We 
saved  one  war.  These  republics  negotiated  with  three  others, 
and  failed,  but  mark  my  words,  we  have  an  international  police 
as  far  as  America  is  concerned.  If  two  men  fight  each  other  in  the 
street  anywhere  that  the  American  flag  floats  they  are  arrested 
by  superior  force,  a protective  force.  So  it  will  be  with  the  South 
American  Republics  before  long.  Mexico  and  the  United  States 


329 

and  other  republics  will  say  to  the  warring  element:  “We  are 
independent,  we  belong  to  the  same  continent,  and  no  nation 
can  be  allowed  to  disturb  the  general  peace  in  which  all  nations 
here  are  mutually  interested.”  That  is  what  we  are  coming  to. 

Now,  my  two  friends,  I accept  that  flag.  I was  born  under 
a flag  that  denied  me  certain  rights  of  citizenship,  therefore  I 
dedicated  my  book  “Triumphant  Democracy”  to  this  Republic 
in  these  words : “To  the  Republic  that  makes  me  the  equal  of  any 
citizen,  although  denied,  by  my  native  land,  equal  rights.”  I dedi- 
cated this  book  with  an  intensity  of  love  and  admiration  which 
the  native-born  citizen  can  neither  see  nor  understand.  (Ap- 
plause.) There  is  the  flag  that  I went  to  the  front  for,  but  let 
me  say  to  you,  however,  that  the  North  favored  arbitration. 

As  to  the  Civil  War,  if  the  Southern  States  had  said : “Four 
hundred  millions  will  buy  our  slave  property,”  if  they  had  said 
“eight  hundred  millions,”  if  they  had  said  “twelve  hundred  mil- 
lions,” it  would  have  been  infinitely  better  for  both  the  North 
and  the  South  could  such  a peaceful  mode  have  been  obtained. 

I shall  keep  that  flag  always,  and  it  never  shall  float  over 
men  killing  each  other,  but  shall  remain  a glorious  heritage  to  my 
successors.  It  will  tell  them  that  I in  my  day  and  generation 
loved  that  flag  and  desired  to  extend  over  the  world  the  reign  of 
Peace  obtained  by  law  and  justice. 

International  Arbitration 

Seth  Low 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : Those  who  have  arranged  the 
program  for  this  Congress  have  done  well  to  make  the  closing 
meeting  a meeting  in  the  interest  of  arbitration;  for,  whatever 
other  methods  may  be  proposed  to  advance  the  cause  of  honor- 
able Peace  between  the  nations  none  are  likely  to  supplant  the 
method  of  International  Arbitration.  It  is  sometimes  said  that 
nations  do  not  always  accept  the  results  of  arbitration.  This  is 
a mistake.  Negotiations  often  fail;  but  whenever  arbitration  has 
been  agreed  upon  its  results  have  always  been  accepted.  It  is 
a just  cause  of  satisfaction  to  the  American  people  that  no  nation 
has  submitted  questions  in  controversy  to  the  decision  of  impar- 
tial arbitration  more  frequently  than  the  United  States,  nor  ques- 
tions of  more  profound  importance.  The  arbitration  of  the  Ala- 


330 

bama  claims  undoubtedly  prevented  war  between  the  two  great 
branches  of  English-speaking  peoples.  This  is,  and  is  likely  to 
remain  for  a long  period,  one  of  the  capital  instances  of  the 
submission  of  an  international  grievance  to  the  decision  of 
impartial  arbitrators ; but  it  is  only  one  out  of  more  than  sixty 
international  arbitrations  in  which  the  United  States  has  been 
engaged.  The  first  of  these  took  place  under  the  treaty  with 
Great  Britain  of  1784,  and  from  that  day  to  the  present  hour 
there  has  scarcely  been  a decade  in  which  some  international 
question  in  which  this  nation  has  been  interested  has  not  been 
adjusted  by  this  means.  The  American  people,  therefore,  are  in 
a position  to  stand  for  International  Arbitration  with  absolute 
good  faith.  In  urging  it,  we  are  only  asking  others  to  do  what 
we  have  done  ourselves. 

The  great  work  accomplished  by  the  First  Hague  Confer- 
ence was  to  make  a resort  to  arbitration,  on  the  part  of  the 
nations,  easier  than  formerly.  This  result  was  obtained  by 
assembling,  so  to  speak,  all  the  parts  necessary  for  the  creation 
of  an  arbitration  tribunal,  so  that  such  a tribunal  could  be  called 
into  being  much  more  readily  than  before.  By  creating  per- 
manent machinery,  also,  for  The  Hague  Court,  by  providing  a 
code  of  procedure,  and  by  proposing  an  arbitration  treaty,  which 
committed  the  signatory  powers  to  adopt  arbitration  in  all  suit- 
able cases,  an  immense  step  forward  was  taken.  It  may  well  be 
hoped  that  the  Second  Hague  Conference  will  develop  still  more 
the  elements  of  permanence  in  The  Hague  Court  which  were 
planted  by  the  action  of  the  First  Conference;  so  that  out  of 
these  two  International  Conferences  there  may  come  not  only  a 
permanent  tribunal  that  may  be  called  into  action  upon  request, 
but  also  a permanent  tribunal  that  shall  hold  sessions  at  stated 
intervals,  as  a court  of  justice  does,  to  dispose  of  any  cases  that 
may  be  brought  to  its  bar.  Such  an  outcome  of  the  Second 
Hague  Conference  would  be  a most  important  step  toward  organ- 
izing the  relations  of  the  nations  upon  a peace  footing. 

Following  the  First  Hague  Conference  an  effort  was  made 
to  secure  the  adoption,  very  widely,  of  general  arbitration  treat- 
ies; and  it  has  been  a matter  of  wide-felt  regret  that  all  of  such 
treaties  submitted  to  the  United  States  Senate  were  so  amended 
by  that  body  as  to  make  them  unacceptable  to  the  Executive 
Department.  It  ought  not  to  be  forgotten,  however,  that,  as 


331 

amended  by  the  Senate,  the  vote  of  that  body  in  favor  of  these 
treaties  was  unanimous.  It  should  always  be  remembered  that 
the  amendments  proposed  by  the  Senate  involved  a question  of 
American  Constitutional  Law  and  not  a question  of  an  unfriendly 
disposition  toward  arbitration.  The  Senate  is  understood  to  have 
maintained  that,  under  the  United  States  Constitution,  the  Senate 
was  not  at  liberty  to  deprive  itself  of  the  duty  of  assenting  as  to 
each  particular  question  of  dispute  at  any  time  to  be  submitted 
to  arbitration.  On  the  other  hand,  the  prerogative  of  the  Presi- 
dent is,  also,  to  be  considered.  It  would  be  unbecoming  in  a 
layman  to  pass  judgment  upon  a constitutional  question  of  this 
character.  But  it  is  not  unbecoming  to  point  out,  at  this  time, 
when  the  question  is  receiving  fresh  attention,  that  any  new 
attempt  to  secure  general  arbitration  treaties  in  which  the  United 
States  is  expected  to  join,  ought  to  take  cognizance  of  this  posi- 
tion of  the  Senate,  and  to  harmonize  it,  if  possible,  with  the  views 
of  the  President.  It  can  scarcely  be  denied  that  upon  the  ques- 
tion of  American  Constitutional  Law  involved  there  is  room  for 
honest  difference  of  opinion.  Doubtless  the  Senate  would  decline 
to  submit  to  arbitration  any  cause  which  it  thought  ought  not  to 
be  so  submitted ; but  the  resort  to  arbitration  must  depend  for 
a long  time,  if  not  always,  upon  popular  satisfaction  with  the 
outcome  of  such  cases  as  are  submitted.  It  is  most  unlikely 
that  this  country  would  long  willingly  agree  to  arbitrate  ques- 
tions which  any  considerable  proportion  of  the  Senate  should 
criticise  as  not  suitable  for  arbitration.  It  is,  therefore,  quite 
as  important  from  the  point  of  view  of  favorable  public  opinion 
in  this  country  to  command  the  support  of  the  Senate  for  the 
questions  to  be  submitted  to  arbitration,  as  it  may  evidently  be 
important  from  the  constitutional  point  of  view.  I earnestly 
urge,  therefore,  that  no  effort  be  spared  to  meet  this  point  in 
any  general  arbitration  treaty  that  may  be  proposed  hereafter. 

It  gives  me  pleasure,  in  throwing  open  to  discussion  this 
general  subject  of  arbitration,  to  welcome  on  behalf  of  the  audi- 
ence the  distinguished  speakers  who  are  to  take  part  in  this  meet- 
ing, and  on  behalf  of  the  speakers,  to  welcome  the  audience  to  the 
discussion.  Time  was  when,  in  order  to  carry  thought  instan- 
taneously from  place  to  place,  some  material  substance,  like  wire, 
was  essential ; but  now  we  know  that  the  atmosphere  itself  may 
be  so  charged  with  messages  of  human  thought  that  the  senti- 


332 

ments  of  the  heart  may  be  carried  from  ship  to  ship,  and  even 
from  one  shore  of  the  ocean  to  another.  It  is  such  a message 
that  we  want  to  send  forth  from  this  Congress  this  afternoon 
on  the  subject  of  International  Arbitration.  We  want  the 
atmosphere  of  the  round  world  to  be  so  filled  with  the  desire  of 
the  peoples  for  the  peaceful  arbitration  of  international  disputes 
that  no  one  having  responsibility  among  the  governments  of  men 
can  fail  to  hear  this  popular  and  universal  prayer;  and  we  want 
this  message  to  be  worded  so  earnestly — and  yet  so  persuasively, 
that  all  who  hear  it  will  give  heed. 

I have  now  the  very  great  pleasure  of  introducing  as  the 
first  speaker  of  this  afternoon  the  Hon.  Richard  Bartholdt,  Mem- 
ber of  Congress  from  Missouri.  Mr.  Bartholdt  was  an  organizer 
and  is  President  of  the  American  group  of  the  Interparliament- 
ary Union.  He  is  the  author  of  the  resolution  approved  by  this 
Union  at  St.  Louis,  upon  which  the  Second  Hague  Conference 
was  called ; and  is  also  author  of  the  plan  approved  by  the  recent 
local  conference  of  the  Interparliamentary  Union,  which  furnishes 
the  basis  of  the  recommendations  of  that  Conference  to  the  Second 
Hague  Conference. 

The  Interparliamentary  Plan 

Richard  Bartholdt 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : If  I could  give 
a speech,  I would  make  it  to  express  my  gratitude  to  you  and 
your  distinguished  Chairman  for  this  complimentary  introduction, 
and  also  express  my  gratification  at  the  contrast  between  this 
great  Congress  and  its  inspiring  scenes,  and  that  little  modest 
home  in  St.  Louis,  where  was  written  the  resolution  in  response 
to  which  President  Roosevelt  has  called  the  Second  Hague  Con- 
ference. This  contrast  makes  me  realize  in  full,  as  never 
realized  before,  that  the  pen  is  mightier  than  the  sword. 

Victor  Hugo  once  said : “Peace  is  the  virtue,  war  the  crime 
of  civilization.”  This  great  Congress  of  Americans,  held  on  the 
eve  of  the  Second  Hague  Conference,  is  to  demonstrate  to  our 
own  government  as  well  as  to  the  governments  of  the  world 
that  American  public  sentiment  to-day  is  more  pronounced  than 
ever  before,  in  favor  of  the  virtue  of  civilization,  Peace. 

Peace  to-day  is  but  an  armistice.  The  arbitrary  will  of  one 


333 

ruler  can  disturb  it  at  any  moment  and  upon  the  least  provo- 
cation. The  people  have  come  to  realize  that  such  arbitrary 
power  should  be  circumscribed  by  binding  international  obliga- 
tions. This  would  involve  a surrender  of  sovereignty,  true,  but 
the  sacrifice  is  asked  to  be  made  for  the  welfare  of  the  people, 
for  the  cause  of  humanity  and  justice.  It  is  a sacrifice  that  every 
individual  must  make  to  live  in  a civilized  community  of  individ- 
uals ; it  is  the  same  a nation  should  make  to  live  in  a civilized 
community  of  nations. 

The  world  to-day  is  burdened  with  armament  until  armed 
peace  Has  become  more  expensive  than  actual  war  was  a genera- 
tion ago.  These  vast  armaments  on  land  and  water  are  being 
defended  as  a means,  not  to  wage  war,  but  to  prevent  war.  It 
is  one  of  the  purposes  of  this  great  Congress  to  show  that  ther£ 
is  a safer  way,  a more  economical  way,  and  a way  more  in 
harmony  with  the  culture  and  enlightenment  of  the  twentieth 
century,  to  preserve  the  Peace  of  the  world  and  secure  it  on  a 
more  permanent  foundation.  This  way  is  as  simple  as  the  “Yea, 
yea,”  of  man,  and  ;t  requires  only  the  consent  and  the  good-will 
of  the  governments.  To-day  they  say : “Si  vis  pacem  para 
bellum!”  If  you  want  peace,  prepare  for  war.  This  Congress 
says  in  behalf  of  the  people:  “Si  vis  pacem,  para  pactum!”  If 
you  want  Peace,  agree  to  keep  the  Peace. 

The  First  Hague  Conference  was  called  by  the  Czar  of 
Russia  to  consider  the  question  of  armaments.  It  would  have 
ended  in  failure  if  this  program  had  been  insisted  upon,  because 
it  was  starting  the  reform  at  the  wrong  end.  No  government 
was  willing  to  give  up  any  part  of  its  war  machinery  which  it 
believed  to  be  necessary  to  safeguard  its  national  security,  nor 
would  any  of  the  governments  agree  even  to  the  fixing  of  a 
future  limit  of  armaments.  Each  believed  that  the  other  was 
actuated  by  some  ulterior  motive  in  the  consideration  of  this 
plan,  and  the  Conference  came  near  being  wrecked  on  the  rock 
of  mutual  distrust.  Eight  years  have  elapsed  since  that  time, 
but  there  is  no  reason  to  assume  that  the  attitude  of  the  European 
governments  has  undergone  a change,  though  the  evil  has 
enormously  grown.  This  is  a great  lesson  for  the  Second  Hague 
Conference.  It  should  take  up  the  work  not  where  the  First 
Conference  failed,  but  where  it  succeeded’.  In  other  words, 
instead  of  wasting  its  time  with  an  academical  discussion  of  the 


334 

disarmament  problem,  it  should  proceed  to  perfect  that  plan  of 
world  organization  which  found  its  happy  expression  in  the  estab- 
lishment of  a world  supreme  court,  the  High  Court  at  The 
Hague  which  I regard  as  by  far  the  greatest  achievement  of  the 
last  century. 

The  plain  people  of  all  countries  are  clamoring  for  partici- 
pation in  government.  True  to  American  patterns,  they  insist 
on  “the  consent  of  the  governed”  being  necessary  even  in  matters 
of  diplomacy,  because  here  the  question  of  war  or  Peace  is 
always  involved.  Rightly  understood,  this  merely  expresses  the 
longing  of  the  people  for  more  enduring  Peace,  and  this  longing 
gave  birth  to  the  great  Interparliamentary  Union,  an  organiza- 
tion now  composed  of  over  two  thousand  members  of  national 
legislative  bodies  who  believe  in  substituting  law  and  justice 
for  force,  or  arbitration  for  war  in  the  settlement  of  international 
disputes.  All  parliaments  of  Europe,  save  one,  are  represented 
in  the  Union,  and,  thanks  to  our  initiative,  the  countries  of  Cen- 
tral and  South  America  are  now  joining  one  by  one.  Since  1904 
the  American  Congress,  too,  through  its  arbitration  group,  is  a 
member  of  that  great  organization,  and  I am  happy  to  say  that 
the  last  three  Conferences  of  the  Union,  held  at  St.  Louis  in 
1904,  at  Brussels  in  1905,  and  at  London  in  1906,  were  attended 
by  American  Congressmen  in  quite  respectable  numbers. 

I am  to  speak  of  the  plan  which  the  Interparliamentary 
Union  wishes  the  next  Hague  Conference  to  consider  in  the 
interest  of  the  world’s  Peace.  The  three  last  meetings  of  the 
Union,  at  St.  Louis,  Brussels,  and  London,  were  almost  exclus- 
ively devoted  to  the  preparation  of  that  plan.  It  is  a program  of 
most  remarkable  simplicity ; and  why  ? Because  the  members 
of  the  Union,  being  represented  by  the  people  and  thus  responsi- 
ble to  their  electorates,  are  necessarily  conservative,  and,  hence, 
unwilling  to  go  beyond  what  is  reasonable  and  timely  and  what 
the  thirty-odd  governments,  to  be  represented  at  The  Hague,  will 
be  in  a position  to  concede  and  agree  to,  right  now  and  without 
any  further  delay. 

The  plan  of  the  Union  is  that  the  nations  agree  to  keep  the 
Peace  by  the  simple  means  of  an  arbitration  treaty  which  refers 
all  minor  controversies  to  The  Hague  Court  for  adjudication, 
and  provides  that  even  in  cases  of  more  important  or  vital  differ- 
ences the  contending  parties  shall  not  go  to  war  until  the  cause 


335 

of  the  trouble  shall  have  been  investigated  either  by  a commission 
of  inquiry  or  through  the  mediation  of  one  or  two  friendly 
powers.  In  other  words,  the  signatory  powers  are  to  enter  into 
a treaty  by  which  The  Hague  Court  is  given  jurisdiction  in 
certain  specified  classes  of  disputes,  while  in  all  other  cases,  not 
so  specified,  an  investigation  shall  first  be  had  before  the  sword 
is  drawn.  A draft  of  such  a treaty  is  now  ready  for  submission 
to  the  Conference.  All  will  admit  that  this  plan  would  seem  a 
long  way  toward  permanent  Peace,  and  no  well-meaning  govern- 
ment could  justify,  by  any  valid  reason,  its  refusal  to  enter  into 
such  an  agreement.  It  is  equally  just  for  all;  it  represents  the 
preference  of  this  enlightened  age  for  Peace  against  war,  for 
law  and  order  and1  justice  as  against  the  anarchy  of  force.  Its 
rejection  by  any  government  would  justly  bring  down  upon  its 
head  the  characterization  of  being  a black  sheep  in  the  family 
of  nations. 

This  is  the  first  cardinal  plank  in  the  platform  of  the  Inter- 
parliamentary Union.  The  second,  and  one  just  as  important, 
is  that  the  next  Hague  Conference  be  made  a permanent  body 
with  the  right  to  meet  periodically  and  automatically  for  the 
discussion  of  such  international  questions  as  the  current  of  events 
may  make  paramount,  and  for  one  other  most  important  pur- 
pose, namely,  to  codify  international  law  and  bring  it  up  to  date. 
The  Hague  Conference  might  well  entrust  this  work  to  a con- 
sultative council  in  which  all  nations  are  represented,  but  who- 
ever may  perform  it,  it  surely  must  be  performed.  No  nation 
and  no  parliament  has  as  yet  sanctioned,  through  the  solemn  forms 
of  legislation,  what  now  passes)  under  the  name  of  international 
law,  consequently  every  government  is  perfectly  free  either  to 
observe  or  to  disregard  it,  unless  it  feels  bound  by  moral  obliga- 
tions. As  a result  of  new  means  of  communication  and  trans- 
portation the  world  has  become  smaller,  if  I may  so  put  it,  and 
the  nations  have  been  brought  to  closer  contact  with  each  other. 
Another  reason  why  the  best  sentiment  of  the  world  should,  with- 
out further  delay,  be  crystallized  into  rules  of  international  law 
is  that  at  present  the  High  Court  at  The  Hague  is  actually  with- 
out a system  of  laws  to  apply  to  causes  which  may  be  submitted 
to  it  for  adjudication.  This  being  the  case,  the  several  nations, 
if  they  were  really  sincere  when  they  created  The  Hague  Court, 
should  at  the  coming  Conference  regard  it  as  their  imperative 


336 

duty  to  supply,  in  the  shape  of  a body  of  laws,  a foundation  upon 
which  that  great  tribunal  is  to  rest. 

The  interparliamentary  plan  comprises  a few  additional 
demands.  The  Union  pleads  for  a discussion  of  the  question  of 
the  limitation  of  armaments,  a definition  of  contraband  of  war, 
immunity  of  private  property  at  sea  in  time  of  war,  prohibition 
of  new  types  of  rifles,  guns,  and  marine  engines  of  war,  and  of 
the  bombardment  of  undefended  ports,  towns,  and  villages;  a 
definition  of  the  rights  and  duties  of  neutrals,  etc.  Definite  agree- 
ments as  to  these  questions  are  highly  desirable;  yet,  I hope  the 
Conference  will  not  permit  its  time  to  be  monopolized  by  them  to 
the  exclusion  of  those  questions  which  I have  just  discussed  and 
which  the  majority  of  the  friends  of  Peace  regard  as  of  infinitely 
greater  importance.  It  is  safe  to  say  that  neither  the  American 
people  nor  the  people  of  any  other  country  will  be  satisfied  if 
their  governments  would  allow  The  Hague  Conference  to  degen- 
erate into  a mere  pow-wow  for  the  regulation  of  war  instead 
of  it  being  a Congress  of  Nations  convened  for  the  purpose  of 
laying  the  foundation  for  more  permanent  Peace.  The  British 
government,  it  is  said,  will  insist  on  a discussion  of  the  advisa- 
bility of  limiting  armaments,  and  expects  the  delegates  from  the 
United  States  to  support  its  demand.  But  this  is  not  an  Ameri- 
can, but  a European  question,  and  while  our  delegates  could  not 
well  object  to  the  discussion,  yet  we  expect  them  to  press  for  the 
consideration  of  the  propositions  which  make  for  Peace  rather 
than  those  which  pertain  to  the  manner  of  warfare.  Under  any 
kind  of  an  arrangement  the  permissible  total  of  armaments  would 
have  to  be  fixed  according  to  population  or  the  volume  of  inter- 
national trade,  and  in  either  case  the  United  States  could  go  on 
expanding  while  on  that  basis  Great  Britain  would  be  obliged  to 
contract.  This  truth  has  already  dawned  upon  the  governments 
of  Continental  Europe,  hence  the  report  that  they  are  raising 
objections  even  to  a discussion  of  the  question. 

Thus  it  may  fall  to  the  lot  of  the  United  States  to  save  the 
life  of  the  Second  Hague  Conference  as  it  has  helped  to  save  the 
first.  I could  not  imagine  my  country  in  a more  exalted  role. 
With  all  the  countries  of  Central  and  South  America  participat- 
ing, America  will  be  a tremendous  factor  at  The  Hague,  because 
in  all  measures  vouchsafing  Peace  these  countries  are  willing  and 
anxious  to  follow  the  lead  of  President  Roosevelt  and  his  great 


337 

Secretary  of  State,  Elihu  Root.  The  Second  Hague  Conference 
was  originally  called  by  President  Roosevelt  at  the  behest  of 
the  Interparliamentary  Union,  and  in  that  call  the  resolution  of 
the  Union  upon  which  the  President’s  sanction  was  based  was 
communicated  in  full  to  all  the  governments  of  the  world.  It 
demanded  the  negotiation  of  a general  arbitration  treaty  between 
all  the  powers  and  the  creation  of  an  International  Congress. 
The  inference  is  that  this  has  committed  the  American  govern- 
ment to  a certain  extent  to  these  two  vital  propositions  which, 
besides — I mention  it  with  justifiable  pride — are  of  American 
origin  and  were  first  proposed  by  members  of  the  American 
Congress  at  the  first  meeting  which  the  Interparliamentary  Union 
ever  held  on  American  soil.  It  required  two  more  conferences 
of  the  Union  before  the  parliamentarians  of  Europe  seceded  to 
and  adopted  them,  with  some  slight  modifications,  as  the  most 
vital  part  of  their  program  for  the  next  Hague  Conference. 
Under  these  circumstances  I hold  that  we  cannot  take  a backward 
step  now  and  disappoint  the  world  by  failing  to  make  the  next 
great  Council  of  Nations  produce  results  proportional  to  the  pos- 
sibilities of  this  hour  and  to  the  rightful  place  of  the  United 
States  in  the  politics  of  the  world.  On  the  contrary  I believe 
I voice  the  sentiment  of  this  Congress  when  I repeat  what  I 
said  in  a letter  to  President  Roosevelt : that  the  prestige  which 
he  has  obtained  throughout  the  world  by  his  successful  inter- 
vention in  the  war  between  Russia  and  Japan,  and  by  other 
acts  in  bringing  The  Hague  Court  into  operation,  points  to  him 
as  the  Chief  Executive  who  should  lead  in  espousing  these  great 
reforms  for  the  benefit  of  mankind  and  thus  achieve  more  glory 
in  one  day  than  could  be  gained  on  a dozen  battlefields  in  a 
hundred  years. 

Mr.  Low: 

I have  now  the  pleasure  of  presenting  as  the  next  speaker 
Judge  William  W.  Morrow,  formerly  a Member  of  the  House 
of  Representatives  and  at  present  the  Circuit  Judge  of  the  United 
States  for  the  Ninth  District;  President  of  the  California  State 
Red  Cross  Society  during  the  recent  troubles  following  the  earth- 
quake, and  a resident  of  San  Francisco.  His  subject  is  “The 
Judiciary  and  Arbitration.” 


22 


338 

The  Judiciary  and  Arbitration 

Judge  William  W.  Morrow 

Mr.  President,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : I am  on  this 
program,  so  I am  informed  by  the  Chairman,  because  I am  from 
the  Pacific,  and  supposed  to  be  in  favor  of  pacific  measures 
(laughter  and  applause)  ; but  I should  lamentably  fail  in  my  duty 
if  I did  not  improve  this  opportunity  to  testify  in  behalf  of  men 
who  are  seeking  to  take  the  same  course  in  all  cases  of  distress 
whether  arising  from  war,  earthquake  or  fire.  We  received  in 
San  Francisco  from  all  parts  of  this  world  millions  of  dollars 
to  relieve  us  from  the  distress  that  came  from  an  appalling  con- 
flagration. This  same  sentiment,  widespread  as  it  is,  is  a senti- 
ment in  favor  of  having  Peace  instead  of  war  and  having  homes 
in  place  of  desolation. 

The  program  announces  that  the  discussion  this  afternoon 
will  be  directed  to  the  International  Arbitration  from  the  legis- 
lative and  judicial  points  of  view.  From  a legislative  point  of 
view  objection  has  been  made  that  there  is  no  international  law 
or  law  of  nations  in  the  legal  sense  as  a rule  of  civil  conduct 
prescribed  and  enforced  by  a superior;  and  it  is  contended,  in 
the  absence  of  such  a law,  that  there  is  no  substantial  foundation 
upon  which  international  arbitration  can  be  permanently  and 
satisfactorily  based;  and  further,  that  there  is  no  international 
legislative  body  clothed  with  authority  to  prescribe  a rule  of  civil 
conduct  for  the  nations  of  the  world. 

The  best  answer  to  this  objection  is  that  there  is  an  inter- 
national law  founded  upon  principles  of  universal  justice,  recog- 
nized by  the  civilized  nations  and  administered  by  their  courts. 
In  Great  Britain  this  international  law  has  been  declared  by  the 
courts  to  be  part  of  the  Common  Law  and  the  inherited  rights  of 
every  citizen  of  that  country.  In  this  country  we  not  only  recog- 
nize this  law  as  part  of  our  inheritance  with  the  Common  Law, 
but  it  is  expressly  recognized  in  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  and  Congress  is  authorized  by  that  great  instrument  to 
enforce  it  in  certain  specified  cases  by  proper  legislation. 
Further  than  this,  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  has 
declared  and  expounded  this  law  as  part  of  that  system  of  justice 
which  alone  can  make  a nation  great  and  powerful. 

But  the  question  arises,  how  may  this  law  of  nations, 


339 

wrought  out  through  long  experience,  be  amended  and  enlarged 
to  meet  the  varying  conditions  and  wants  of  nations  coming  into 
a peaceful  union  to  support  and  administer  the  principles  of  uni- 
versal justice? 

A strong  basis  upon  which  to  build  a great  superstructure 
is  well  illustrated  by  the  laws  of  commerce,  and  those  laws  based 
upon  customs  under  which  the  great  mining  industries  of  this 
country  have  been  developed  and  their  enormous  wealth  poured 
into  the  channels  of  commerce  for  the  benefit  of  mankind.  But 
the  time  comes  when  the  lawgiver  must  anticipate  the  wants  of 
the  people,  he  must  bring  down  the  tablets  of  law  from  Mt. 
Sinai,  from  the  hearts  of  mankind,  and  deliver  them  to  the 
nations  of  the  world.  The  wisdom  of  the  lawmaker  must  be 
brought  into  the  service,  and  this  is  one  of  the  propositions  that 
we  now  urge  upon  The  Hague  Conference,  the  creation  of  an 
International  Parliamentary  body  as  proposed  by  Mr.  Bartholdt. 
(Applause.)  We  hope  the  proposition  may  be  formulated  into 
the  great  scheme  of  International  Government. 

The  second  objection  is  from  the  judicial  standpoint,  and 
is  that  there  is  no  executive  power  to  enforce  the  judgments  of 
the  court. 

The  answer  to  this  objection  is  that  a wise  court  adminis- 
tering justice  seldom  needs  a sheriff.  Its  decrees  are  obeyed 
without  the  use  of  force.  This  is  peculiarly  the  case  in  Inter- 
national Arbitration. 

Mr.  Carnegie  tells  us,  in  his  introduction  to  Hayne  Davis’s 
book  entitled  “Among  the  World’s  Peacemakers,”  that  in  571 
international  questions  settled  by  arbitration  since  the  year  1794 
all  but  one  were  carried  into  effect,  and  the  one  that  failed  did 
not  fail  because  of  the  lack  of  a sheriff  to  execute  the  judgments 
of  the  courts  but  because  the  arbitrators  misunderstood  the  power 
conferred  upon  them  by  the  arbitration.  The  judgment  of  a 
great  international  court  will  be  obeyed,  because  it  is  in  the 
interest  of  universal  justice,  and  justice  is  always  a greater  power 
than  mere  executive  force. 

The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  enforces  its  judg- 
ment in  controversies  between  States,  and  they  are  obeyed  with- 
out the  aid  of  the  President  or  his  “Big  Stick.”  (Laughter  and 
applause).  We  hope,  therefore,  that  The  Hague  Conference  will 
establish  a permanent  tribunal  of  arbitration,  where  the  great 


340 

principles  of  international  justice  may  be  discovered  and  admin- 
istered for  the  benefit  of  mankind,  and  with  a permanent  parlia- 
mentary body  authorized  to  enlarge  and  amend  the  law  of 
nations,  a tribunal  empowered  to  determine  certain  controversies 
between  nations,  the  crushing  weight  of  war  will  pass  away  and 
the  Prince  of  Peace  stand  on  the  mountain  top  with  a face  radiant 
with  celestial  light. 

Mr.  Low: 

I have  now  the  pleasure  of  introducing  as  the  next  speaker 
the  Hon.  John  W.  Foster,  a man  so  highly  thought  of  in  his 
own  country  that  he  has  been  one  of  that  distinguished  body  of 
men  who  have  served  as  Secretary  of  State  of  the  United  States, 
a man  so  highly  thought  of  on  the  other  side  of  the  world  that 
he  has  been  named  by  the  Emperor  of  China  as  one  of  its  dele- 
gates to  this  Second  Hague  Conference.  (Applause.)  Mr. 
Foster  is  also  President  of  the  National  Arbitration  Congress 
recently  held  at  Washington. 

The  Growth  of  International  Arbitration 

Hon.  John  W.  Foster 

In  indicating  on  the  program  for  this  afternoon’s  discussion 
the  legislative  and  judicial  aspects  of  the  Peace  Movement,  I 
take  it  for  granted  that  it  was  intended  to  include  the  international 
legislation  of  treaty  enactment  to  that  end.  I desire  to  consider 
very  briefly  the  existing  and  proposed  provisions  respecting  Inter- 
national Arbitration. 

As  we  all  know,  the  Hague  Arbitration  Convention  of  1899 
did  not  provide  for  compulsory  arbitration.  Hence,  it  was  in 
effect  little  more  than  a declaration  of  the  nations  that  the  settle- 
ment of  international  controversies  by  peaceful  arbitration  was 
desirable  whenever  such  a settlement  was  found  practicable.  For 
this  reason  an  effort  was  made  to  heal  this  defect  by  bringing 
about  among  the  leacling  nations  separate  treaties  to  submit  cer- 
tain classes  of  controversies  to  arbitration.  But  in  all  those 
treaties  there  was  a proviso  that  the  questions  submitted  should 
not  involve  the  vital  interests,  the  independence,  or  the  honor  of 
the  contracting  parties.  Such  conventions  now  exist  between 
Great  Britain  and  France,  and  between  each  of  those  countries 
and  a number  of  other  European  powers. 


34i 

Similar  conventions  between  the  United  States  and  each  of 
several  European  and  American  nations  were  submitted  two 
years  ago  to  the  Senate  for  its  constitutional  sanction,  but  because 
of  a difference  of  views  between  the  President  and  the  Senate, 
those  conventions  did  not  go  into  operation.  While  this  want  of 
agreement  was  lamented,  there  was  a general  feeling  among  the 
friends  of  arbitration  that  the  cause  was  not  seriously  affected 
by  this  failure,  for  the  reason  that  they  regarded  those  conven- 
tions as  very  defective  and  not  such  as  were  required  to  maintain 
Peace  among  the  nations. 

They  were  defective  in  two  respects.  First,  they  embraced 
only  a limited  class  of  cases  to  be  arbitrated;  and,  second,  the 
proviso  practically  nullified  the  stipulations,  for  an  unwilling 
nation  might  readily  allege  that  almost  any  question  involved  its 
vital  interests  or  its  honor.  It  was  felt  by  the  earnest  and  thought- 
ful friends  of  arbitration  in  this  country  that  we  must  labor  for 
a higher  standard  of  self-abnegation  among  the  nations,  if  arbi- 
tration was  to  take  the  place  of  war  in  the  adjustment  of  inter- 
national disputes.  But  it  will  be  contended  that  the  United  States 
will  never  agree  unconditionally  to  refer  all  questions  affecting 
its  honor  or  its  vital  interests  to  the  adjudication  of  a foreign 
tribunal.  Why  not?  Is  not  this  just  what  is  done  between  indi- 
viduals in  all  constitutional  and  well-ordered  nations?  Can  we 
ever  hope  for  a peaceful  method  of  settling  international  dis- 
putes if  each  nation  reserves  the  right  to  decide  whether  or  not 
the  controversy  involves  its  vital  interests  or  its  honor? 

This  question  was  carefully  considered  by  a committee  of 
able  and  experienced  public  men  during  the  session  of  the  Arbi- 
tration Conference  in  Washington  in  1904.  They  had  been 
appointed  to  consider  the  provisions  of  an  arbitration  treaty 
between  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain.  The  committee 
consisted  of  five  persons  who  had  represented  our  country  abroad 
as  ambassadors  and  ministers ; one  was  a member  of  our  federal 
court,  two  were  judges  of  The  Hague  Arbitration  Tribunal,  the 
majority  of  them  were  lawyers  of  eminence,  others  were  recog- 
nized authorities  on  international  law,  editors  and  university 
professors.  This  committee  by  unanimity  reported  to  the  Con- 
ference that  the  proper  treaty  of  arbitration  to  be  entered  into 
between  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain  was  one  which 
should  embrace  all  differences  which  could  not  be  adjusted  by 


342 

diplomatic  negotiations,  without  any  reservation.  After  full  con- 
sideration the  report  was  unanimously  approved  by  the  Confer- 
ence, which  was  composed  of  representative  citizens  from  all 
sections  of  the  country. 

If  such  a convention  is  judicious  and  proper  between  the 
United  States  and  Great  Britain,  why  may  it  not  be  adopted 
between  the  United  States  and  other  nations?  Such,  in  my 
opinion,  is  the  standard  which  should  be  set  by  the  American 
friends  of  International  Arbitration.  It  is  very  probable  it  will 
not  be  reached  at  the  next  Hague  Conference.  Its  realization  may 
not  come  in  our  day.  But  it  is  the  only  sure  method  of  preserving 
Peace  among  the  nations. 

I can  not  do  better  than  close  my  remarks  by  quoting  the 
language  of  one  of  the  most  eminent  diplomatists  of  modern 
times.  Lord  Augustus  Loftus  represented  Great  Britain  for 
nearly  fifty  years,  residing  during  that  period  in  all  the  leading 
capitals  of  Europe.  He  was  familiar  with  the  negotiations  attend- 
ing the  Crimean  War  of  1854,  the  Italian  campaigns  of  1854-60, 
the  Franco-German  war  of  1870,  the  Russo-Turkish  war  of  1877, 
and  the  various  other  hostile  operations  in  Europe,  and  had  seen 
the  rise  of  the  great  military  establishments  which  in  those  times 
had  become  the  fixed  policy  of  the  Great  Powers.  His  mature 
judgment,  at  the  close  of  his  long  and  eventful  career,  was  that 
the  only  way  to  prevent  the  repetition  of  those  cruel  wars  and 
to  abate  those  great  armaments  was  to  “institute  by  common 
assent  among  the  powers  of  the  world  a new  system  of  arbitra- 
tion to  compose  all  differences  and  disputes  between  governments 
and  nations.” 

If  this  humane  and  philanthropic  idea  could  be  realized 
the  monstrous  armies  which  are  now  ruining  the  nations  of 
Europe  would  no  longer  be  necessary,  and  it  may  be  hoped  that 
Peace  and  good-will  would  bind  all  nations  in  one  bond  of 
Christian  friendship,  and  obliterate  all  feelings  of  animosity  and 
ill-will. 

I fear,  however,  that  we  have  not  yet  arrived  at  that  happy 
stage  of  practical  concord,  and  that,  on  the  contrary,  the  vast 
armaments  so  destructive  to  Peace  will  be  brought  into  action  at 
no  distant  date.  The  maintenance  of  these  costly  armies  is  worse 
than  a state  of  war,  and  acts  most  prejudicially  on  the  develop- 
ment of  trade  and  industry. 


343 

“The  question  of  general  disarmament  has  often  been  mooted, 
but  invariably  failed.  I feel  confident  that  nothing  will  or  can 
be  done  to  remedy  this  evil  till  all  the  powers  agree  to  institute 
for  a war  a system  of  arbitration  for  the  settlement  of  all  inter- 
national disputes.” 

Mr.  Low: 

I now  have  the  pleasure  of  introducing  to  you  as  the  next 
speaker  Senor  Diego  Mendoza,  formerly  President  of  the  Repub- 
lican University  of  Colombia,  S.A.,  and  Minister  Plenipotentiary 
from  Colombia  to  the  United  States,  a noted  authority  on  Inter- 
national Law,  and  Professor  on  that  subject  in  the  Republican 
University  of  Colombia,  a Member  of  the  Academy  of  Bogota. 
Senor  Mendoza  will  speak  on  “The  Prophecy  of  Bolivar  Real- 
ized.” I am  not  entirely  sure  that  the  great  liberator  of  Northern 
South  America  may  not  be  better  known  to  the  audience  as 
“Bolivar”  (with  the  accent  on  the  last  syllable). 

The  Prophecy  of  Bolivar  Realized 

Diego  Mendoza 

Mr.  President  and  Members  of  the  National  Arbitra- 
tion and  Peace  Congress:  I must  first  express  my  deep  grati- 
tude for  the  consideration  shown  to  the  history  of  Latin-America, 
and  to  those  who  made  it,  in  the  kind  invitation  which  was 
extended  to  me  to  speak  at  this  Congress  to  the  representatives  of 
numerous  and  respected  organizations,  and  who  endeavor  cease- 
lessly, both  in  Europe  and  in  America,  to  bring  about  the  reign 
of  Justice  and  Peace  among  all  the  different  communities  compos- 
ing the  human  family.  The  ideal  which  has  brought  us  together 
in  this  hall,  bearing  the  name  of  an  eminent  philanthropist  of 
the  United  States,  is  the  same  that  inspired  Bolivar’s  mind  in 
1815,  and  the  same  that  the  Interparliamentary  Union  condensed 
into  three  propositions  approved  at  its  St.  Louis  session.  The 
resolution  of  St.  Louis  is  as  follows : 

“The  Conference  requests  the  several  governments  of  the 
world  to  send  representatives  to  an  International  Conference,  to 
be  held  at  a time  and  place  to  be  agreed  upon  by  them  for  the 
purpose  of  considering : 

“First,  the  questions  for  the  consideration  of  which  the 


344 

Conference  at  The  Hague  expressed  a wish  that  a future  confer- 
ence be  called; 

“Second,  the  negotiation  of  arbitration  treaties  between  the 
nations  represented  at  the  Conference  to  be  convened; 

“Third,  the  advisability  of  establishing  an  international 
Congress  to  convene  periodically  for  the  discussion  of  interna- 
tional questions.” 

Bolivar’s  exact  words  in  1815  were  as  follows: 

“May  it  be  granted  that  some  day  we  be  happy  enough  to 
install  an  august  body  of  the  representatives  of  republics,  king- 
doms, and  empires,  to  consider  and  discuss  the  weighty  questions 
of  Peace  and  war  with  the  nations  of  the  other  parts  of  the  world. 
The  existence  of  such  a congress  will  be  possible  at  some  future 
epoch  in  our  march  onward.” 

For  the  purpose  of  enabling  this  illustrious  Congress  to 
appreciate  the  development  of  that  noble  thought  in  the  exalted 
soul  of  the  Liberator  of  my  people  I shall  recount  briefly  the 
consecutive  stages  of  his  immortal  career  as  linked  to  the  rapid 
crystallization  of  his  ideal. 

The  first  consequential  revolutionary  movement  against 
Spanish  rule  was  organized  in  Venezuela  under  the  leadership  of 
General  Francisco  Miranda,  who  played  an  important  part  in  the 
French  Revolution.  The  failure  of  his  expedition,  in  1812, 
resulted  in  his  capture  by  the  Spanish  authorities,  and  in 
compelling  Bolivar  to  seek  refuge  on  foreign  shores.  Having, 
however,  received  news  that  the  Granadine  patriots  had  conquered 
the  Province  of  Carthagena,  Bolivar  tendered  his  services  to 
them.  With  a small  army  placed  under  his  command  he  invaded 
Venezuela,  and  after  a comparatively  short  campaign,  he  entered 
Caracas  as  victor.  Fortune  turned  against  him  later  on ; he  was 
routed  at  the  battle  of  Aragua,  in  1814.  Bolivar  then  returned 
to  New  Granada,  where  Congress  appointed  him  Commander- 
in-Chief  of  the  Union  army,  but  an  unfortunate  disagreement 
with  the  Carthagena  Government  made  him  an  exile  again.  It 
was  while  he  was  a refugee  in  Kingston,  in  1815,  that  he  wrote 
to  a friend  in  the  terms  above  quoted. 

Efficiently  supported  by  Petion,  President  of  Hayti,  Bolivar 
invaded  Venezuela  anew,  and  though  he  was  defeated,  Petion 
did  not  abandon  him,  but  furnished  him  with  the  necessary 
elements  for  a new  liberating  campaign.  This  time  Bolivar  met 


345 

with  remarkable  success;  without  delay  he  proceeded  to  convene 
the  Angostura  Congress  which  confirmed  the  powers  vested  in 
him  by  victory  on  the  battle-fields.  By  means  of  a renowned 
strategic  movement  the  Liberator  invaded  New  Granada  in  1819 
with  a well-disciplined  army  of  veterans ; crossed  the  Andes,  and 
after  sixty-five  days  of  unprecedented  marches  through  desert 
and  inundated  planes  he  scaled  the  snow-capped  Eastern  Andes 
ranges,  and  took  by  surprise  General  Barreiro,  commanding  the 
Spanish  Thirds,  whom  he  routed  completely  on  the  7th  of 
August,  1819.  This  battle  of  Boyaca  gave  independence  to  New 
Granada.  After  establishing  its  government,  headed  by  General 
Santander,  Bolivar  returned  to  Angostura.  The  Congress  that 
met  in  that  city  carried  out  the  first  part  of  the  Liberator’s 
dreams,  for  on  the  17th  of  December,  1819,  the  Confederacy 
called  Greater  Colombia  was  constituted.  It  was  composed  of 
New  Granada,  Venezuela,  and  Ecuador.  The  Congress  of 
Cucuta,  which  convened  in  1821,  formulated  the  Constitution  for 
Greater  Colombia. 

Bolivar  did  not  allow  himself  any  rest.  Very  soon  after  the 
Angostura  Congress  he  returned  to  New  Granada,  and  in  his 
capacity  of  President  of  Greater  Colombia  he  achieved  Ecuador’s 
independence.  Immediately  after  this  he  solicited  permission 
from  the  Colombian  Congress  to  liberate  Peru.  San  Martin, 
Protector  of  Peru  and  Commander-in-Chief  of  the  allied  armies 
of  Chili  and  Argentina,  resigned  his  powers  in  favor  of  Bolivar 
for  the  sake  of  the  cause  of  South  American  independence.  The 
last  battle  was  fought  at  Ayacucho  on  the  9th  of  December,  1824, 
under  the  command  of  Sucre,  one  of  Bolivar’s  distinguished 
lieutenants. 

Two  days  before  this  final  victory,  Bolivar,  as  President  of 
Colombia  and  Dictator  of  Peru,  addressed  to  all  governments  of 
South  America  his  world-famed  circular  of  the  7th  of  December, 
1824.  In  that  circular  he  said : 

“After  fifteen  years  of  sacrifices  devoted  to  the  independence 
of  America  struggling  to  establish  the  system  of  guarantees  that 
are  to  be,  both  in  Peace  and  in  war,  the  shield  of  our  new 
conquered  destiny,  it  is  time  to  consider  that  the  mutual  interests 
and  the  relations  binding  together  the  American  Republics — 
formerly  Spanish  colonies — must  be  placed  on  a fundamental 
basis  so  as  to  perpetuate  the  stability  of  their  government. 


346 

“Mindful  of  these  ideas,  I invited,  in  1822,  as  President  of 
the  Republic  of  Colombia,  the  Governments  of  Mexico,  Peru, 
Chili,  and  Buenos  Ayres  to  form  a Confederacy,  and  to  convoke, 
to  meet  at  Panama  or  at  any  other  place  that  a majority  might 
select,  an  Assembly  of  Plenipotentiaries  from  every  State  to  serve 
us  as  counsel  in  all  great  conflicts,  as\  point  of  contact  in  all 
common  dangers,  as  faith-interpreter  of  public  treaties,  when 
difficulties  arise,  and,  finally,  as  conciliator  of  our  differences.” 

The  Liberator’s  conception  assumed  a still  more  definite 
shape  in  the  instructions  that  he  addressed,  through  Field-Mar- 
shal Sucre,  to  the  Peruvian  Delegates  at  the  Panama  Congress. 
The  Liberator  desired  that  “the  Assembly  should  be  permanent 
so  as  to  answer  these  importants  ends:  1st — To  watch  over  the 
exact  observance  of  treaties,  and  over  the  safety  of  the  Federacy ; 
2nd — To  mediate  amicably  between  any  of  the  allied  States  and 
foreign  Powers,  should  any  controversy  arise;  3rd — To  act  as 
conciliator  and  even  as  arbitrator,  if  possible,  between  the  allies, 
should  they  unfortunately  have  subject  for  antagonism  tending 
to  disrupt  their  relations.” 

At  the  Panama  Congress  were  represented  Colombia,  Central 
America,  Mexico,  and  Peru.  I beg  leave  to  quote  from  the 
treaty  of  alliance,  signed  by  them  on  the  15th  of  July,  1826,  the 
following  articles : 

“Article  11.  The  contracting  parties  desiring  more  and 
more  to  strengthen  and  make  closer  their  fraternal  bonds  and 
relations  by  means  of  frequent  and  friendly  conferences,  have 
agreed  and  do  agree  to  meet  every  two  years  in  time  of  Peace 
and  every  year  during  the  present  and  future  common  wars,  in 
a general  assembly  composed  of  two  Ministers  Plenipotentiary 
on  the  part  of  each  party,  who  shall  be  only  authorized  by  the 
necessary  full  powers. 

“Article  13.  The  principal  objects  of  the  general  assembly 
of  Ministers  Plenipotentiary  of  the  confederated  powers  are : 

“First.  To  negotiate  and  conclude  between  the  Powers  it 
represents  all  such  treaties,  conventions,  and  arrangements,  as 
may  place  their  reciprocal  relations  on  a mutually  agreeable  and 
satisfactory  footing. 

“Second.  To  contribute  to  the  maintenance  of  a friendly 
and  unalterable  Peace  between  the  confederate  powers,  serving 
them  as  a counsel  in  times  of  great  conflict,  as  a point  of  contact 


347 

in  common  dangers,  as  a faithful  interpreter  of  the  public  treaties 
and  conventions  concluded  by  them  in  the  said  assembly,  when 
any  doubt  arises  as  to  their  construction,  and  as  a conciliator  in 
their  controversies  and  differences. 

“Third.  To  endeavor  to  secure  conciliation,  or  mediation  in 
all  questions  which  may  arise  between  the  allied  Powers,  or 
between  any  of  them  and  one  or  more  Powers  foreign  to  the 
Confederation  whenever  threatened  with  rupture,  or  engaged  in 
war  because  of  grievances,  serious  injuries,  or  other  complaints. 

“Article  16.  The  contracting  parties  solemnly  obligate  and 
bind  themselves  to  amicably  compromise  between  themselves  all 
differences  now  existing  or  which  may  arise  in  the  future ; in 
case  no  settlement  can  be  reached  between  the  disagreeing 
powers  the  question  shall  be  taken  for  settlement  to  the  judg- 
ment of  the  assembly,  whose  decision  shall  not  be  obligatory, 
however,  unless  said  powers  shall  have  expressly  agreed  that  it 
shall  be. 

“Article  17.  Whatever  complaints  for  injuries,  serious 
damage,  or  other  grounds  there  be  that  one  of  the  contracting 
parties  can  bring  against  another  or  others,  neither  of  them  shall 
declare  war  nor  order  acts  of  reprisal  against  the  Republic 
believed  to  be  the  offender,  without  first  submitting  its  case, 
supported  by  the  necessary  documents  and  proofs,  with  a detailed 
relation  of  the  acts  complained  of  to  conciliatory  decision  of  the 
general  assembly. 

“Article  18.  In  case  any  one  of  the  confederated  Powers 
deem  it  advisable  to  declare  war  or  commence  hostilities  against 
any  Power  foreign  to  this  Confederation,  it  shall  first  solicit  the 
good  offices,  interposition,  and  mediation  of  its  allies,  and  these 
are  bound  to  employ  them  in  the  most  efficacious  manner  possible. 
If  the  interposition  be  unavailing  the  Confederation  shall  declare 
whether  or  not  it  embraces  the  cause  of  the  confederate;  and 
even  though  it  shall  not  embrace  it,  it  shall  not,  under  any 
pretext  or  reason,  ally  itself  with  the  enemy  of  the  confederate.” 

It  is  plain,  therefore,  that  the  Panama  Congress  proclaimed 
the  true  principles  put  forward  by  Bolivar.  The  treaties  were 
not  ratified  by  all  the  contracting  parties ; but  they  are  an 
historical  antecedent  that  this  august  Congress  will  no  doubt 
insert  in  its  right  place  as  one  of  the  links  in  the  golden  chain 


348 

which  is  now  being  forged  in  the  workshops  of  justice  and  of 
Peace  founded  on  justice. 

Previous  to  1826,  in  every  treaty  negotiated  by  Colombia  with 
other  American  countries  it  is  stipulated  that  the  Panama 
Congress  “shall  not  affect  in  any  manner  the  exercise  of  the 
national  sovereignty  of  the  contracting  parties  in  regard  to  their 
laws  and  the  establishment  and  form  of  their  respective  govern- 
ments.,, 

There  is  no  question,  as  Bolivar  said,  of  affecting  in  any 
manner  the  exercise  of  the  national  sovereignty  of  the  Powers 
in  respect  to  their  laws  and  the  establishment  and  form  of  their 
respective  governments.  The  ends  aimed  at  are  Peace  by  means 
of  justice.  The  coveted  goal  is  to  convince  all  nations,  large  and 
small,  to  submit  their  acts  to  the  impartial  investigation  of 
judges  voluntarily  appointed  by  themselves;  to  define  the  rights, 
obligations,  and  responsibilities  of  each  of  them;  to  establish  a 
Union  on  common  principles  whose  mere  enunciation  will  be 
sufficient  to  exclude  all  thought  of  an  appeal  to  force. 

Those  who  may  doubt  the  efficiency  of  the  efforts  of  the 
pacific  settlement  or  differences  between  nations  need  only  to 
recall  the  skepticism  with  which  the  First  Hague  Conference  was 
received.  Nevertheless,  a permanent  International  Court  exists 
to-day  as  a result  of  that  Conference. 

The  Conferences  of  American  Republics  which  have  taken 
place  during  the  past  fifteen  years,  first  at  Washington,  then  at 
the  City  of  Mexico,  and  last  year  at  Rio  Janeiro,  and  the 
provision  adopted  at  the  Rio  Conference  for  future  periodical 
meetings  of  the  organization  will  undoubtedly  bring  about  a 
permanent  Pan-American  Union. 

The  aspiration  of  Bolivar  will  be  at  last  realized.  But  even 
greater  results  are  nearing  realization.  Through  the  initiation 
and  suggestion  of  the  Interparliamentary  Union  the  Latin- 
American  nations  are  on  the  eve  of  assisting  at  a Conference  of 
all  the  nations  of  the  world.  The  Interparliamentary  Union  and 
the  Association  for  International  Conciliation  are  making  plans 
to  secure  the  periodic  assembling  of  such  a conference,  at  which 
all  nations  will  assist. 

A slight  sketch  of  the  ideas  and  acts  of  the  Liberator  of 
my  people  has  been  drawn  before  your  eyes.  The  Republics  of 
South  America  have  generally  followed  Bolivar’s  teaching  on 


349 

this  subject.  In  not  a few  of  the  conflicts  in  which  those  nations 
have  found  themselves  entangled  have  they  appealed  to  arbitra- 
tion for  the  purpose  of  settling  disputes ; and  their  fidelity  to 
the  convictions  of  the  Founder  have  saved  them  from  many 
evils.  To-day,  upon  their  assistance  at  the  Second  Hague 
Conference,  when  our  countries  will  come  definitely  into  the 
concert  of  the  family  of  nations,  they  claim  for  themselves  the 
glory  of  having  been,  through  Bolivar,  the  initiators  of  an  irre- 
sistible movement  in  favor  of  Universal  Peace.  Such  is  my 
people’s  message. 

Mr.  Low: 

The  Hon.  James  P.  McCreary,  United  States  Senator  from 
Kentucky,  would  be  here  to  speak  upon  “The  United  States 
Senate  and  the  Arbitration  Movement”  but  he  is  kept  away  by 
the  illness  of  his  wife,  and  has  sent  a telegram  explaining  his 
absence  in  these  words : “I  am  in  favor  of  general  arbitration 
treaties  among  nations,  and  I shall  use  my  best  efforts  in  the 
United  States  Senate  for  this  great  achievement.  I hope  the 
Hague  Court  will  be  increased  in  power  and  permanence.” 

It  was  thought  that  Representative  McCall  of  Massachu- 
setts, might  be  here ; but  he,  too,  has  been  kept  away.  I have, 
however,  the  very  great  pleasure  of  presenting  to  you  the  Hon. 
George  Gray,  of  Delaware,  who,  by  reason  of  his  distinguished 
service  in  the  United  States  Senate  and  in  the  United  States 
Court,  and  as  arbitrator  in  matters  of  industrial  controversy,  is 
most  welcome  to  this'  platform.  (Applause.) 

International  Public  Opinion 

Judge  George  Gray 

Mr.  President,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : To  adopt  the 
stereotyped  phrase  of  a modest  man,  this  is  a very  unexpected 
call.  I was  not  down  upon  the  list  of  those  who  were  to  address 
this  assembly  and  came  here  to  listen  and  not  to  speak.  I 
arrived  in  this  city  this  afternoon  because  I could  not  keep  away ; 
somehow  I felt  I ought  to  be  here,  if  only  to  breathe  the  atmos- 
phere of  enthusiasm  and  purpose  and  resolution  which  I feel  is 
the  atmosphere  of  this  meeting;  to  draw  inspiration  from  the 
intelligent  faces  of  American  men  and  women  whom  I see  before 


350 

me,  all  instinct  with  those  feelings  of  humanity  which  cross 
national  borders  and  embrace  all  the  civilized  world.  (Applause.) 

My  friends,  it  seemed  to  me,  as  I sat  here  this  afternoon 
and  listened  to  the  eloquent  words  of  encouragement  from  the 
lips  of  those  who  have  preceded  me,  how  true  it  was,  as  said  by 
Edmund  Burke  many  years  ago,  that  before  any  great  epoch  in 
the  world’s  history,  before  any  great  event  upon  which  the 
destinies  of  men  and  of  nations  hung,  there  was  a preparation 
long  continued,  a stream  of  tendency  that  bore  along  the 
thought  of  the  world  until,  when  finally  the  consummation  came, 
it  seemed  the  most  natural  and  inevitable  thing  that  could  happen. 
So  it  is  with  this  great  Propaganda  of  Peace  that  has  been  going 
on  for  the  past  few  years  in  this  country  and  all  over  the 
civilized  world.  There  has  been  a long  preparation  for  such  a 
consummation  as  we  now  are  witnessing.  The  peoples  of  the 
wrorld  are  being  drawn  closer  together;  the  estranging  seas  no 
longer  separate,  they  unite,  the  people  of  the  Old  World  with  the 
New ; and  the  solidarity  of  material  interests  has  produced  some- 
thing like  a solidarity  of  thought  and  feeling.  The  belief  that 
what  was  hurtful  or  injurious  to  the  prosperity  and  well-being 
of  one  country  might  be  helpful  and  beneficial  to  another,  is  not 
so  prevalent  as  it  once  was.  We  no  longer  consider  the  advance 
of  alien  peoples  in  wealth  and  prosperity  as  a menace  to  our 
own,  and  we  begin  to  realize  that  the  material  waste  and  destruc- 
tion, and  moral  deterioration  of  a war  between  nations,  however 
remote,  must  to  some  extent  injuriously  affect  the  whole  civilized 
world.  The  sober,  common-sense  of  the  peoples  of  the  world, 
seems  at  last  to  have  an  opportunity  to  assert  itself,  and  require 
that  the  controversies  between  nations  shall,  for  the  most  part  at 
least,  be  settled  as  the  controveries  between  individuals  are  settled 
in  all  civilized  countries. 

We  are  here,  my  friends,  if  I understand  the  object  of  this 
Congress,  to  place  as  far  as  we  can  behind  our  representatives, 
who  are  to  meet  at  the  Second  Hague  Conference,  the  evidence 
of  what  we  conceive  to  be  the  settled  public  opinion  of  this 
country,  and  to  hold  up  their  hands  and  to  encourage  their 
endeavors  to  enlarge  the  sphere  of  The  Hague  Tribunal,  and 
thus  make  it  more  efficient  in  the  good  work  it  is  expected  to 
accomplish.  We  want  to  say  to  this  Second  Conference,  that  the 
first  step,  though  halting,  will  be  followed  by  a second  one,  so 


35i 

sure  and  so  certain  that  we  all  may  feel  we  are  treading  a path 
which  will  lead  us  ultimately  to  International  Peace,  by  means  of 
International  Arbitration.  (Applause.) 

I do  not  share  the  fear,  sometimes  expressed,  that  the  martial 
virtues  will  lapse  into  desuetude ; that  courage,  chivalric  devo- 
tion to  duty,  and  the  willingness  to  sacrifice  life  itself,  in  defence 
of  our  hearths  and  our  homes,  will  not  be  illustrated  in  the 
future  as  in  the  past,  whatever  may  be  the  outcome  of  The  Hague 
Conference.  These  qualities  are  all  necessary  to  maintain  the 
dignity  and  self-respect  of  nations,  as  of  individuals,  and  must 
so  inform  the  public  spirit  of  the  nations  who  submit  their 
controversies  to  arbitration,  that  their  conduct  shall  be  consistent 
with  their  highest  honor,  and  not  a craven  avoidance  of  the 
dangers  of  war.  When  this  is  true,  the  exception  from  the 
domain  of  arbitration  of  questions  concerning  the  “vital  interests’’ 
and  “honor”  of  a nation,  will  be  of  less  importance  than  it  is 
now  supposed  to  be,  and  it  will  be  found  that  the  honor  of  that 
nation  is  most  deeply  involved  when  it  refuses  to  submit  its 
international  differences  to  the  judicial  arbitrament  of  the  Perma- 
nent Court  provided  by  The  Hague  Conference.  Do  what  we 
may,  there  will  still  be  room  for  our  armies  and  our  navies,  if 
for  nothing  else  than  the  mere  duty  of  keeping  the  Peace,  for 
we  intend  to  have  International  Peace,  even  if  we  have  to  fight 
for  it.  (Laughter  and  applause.) 

Now,  Mr.  President,  after  all  that  has  been  said  I feel  more 
and  more  that  what  we  have  to  depend  upon,  what  our  great 
reliance  is  to  be  for  the  future  of  this  great  movement,  is  the 
education  and  development  of  public  opinion ; not  only  the  public 
opinion  of  this  great  land  of  ours,  but  an  International  Public 
Opinion  that  will  make  it  impossible,  or  at  least  (not  to  be  too 
extravagant  in  our  hope)  to  make  it  a little  more  difficult  in  the 
future  than  it  has  been  in  the  past,  for  nations  to  go  to  war  for 
the  settlement  of  international  controversies.  When  we  accom- 
plish that  much,  we  will  have  accomplished  a great  deal,  and 
will  have  started  upon  a course  that  will  lead  to  greater  and 
higher  results. 

The  first  Hague  Conference  crystallized  the  best  thoughts 
and  aspirations  of  men  for  generations  in  the  past,  and  the 
intellectual  ferment  of  centuries  found  rest  and  hope  in  its  result. 
It  was  the  first  step  out  of  chaos,  and  we  have  a right  to  expect 


352 

nothing  but  orderly  progression  for  the  future.  The  Permanent 
Tribunal  is  a challenge  to  the  public  opinion  of  the  world, — that 
public  opinion  which  controls  Kings  and  Cabinets  and  the 
destinies  of  nations.  As  General  Foster  has  well  said,  it  does 
not  make  a great  deal  of  difference  now  whether  we  have  Arbi- 
tration Treaties  supplemental  to  the  Convention  of  The  Hague 
Conference,  or  not.  This  International  Public  Opinion,  of  which 
I have  spoken,  properly  developed  and  properly  educated,  will 
supply  the  moral  coercion  that  will  compel  the  nations  to  submit 
their  controversies  to  the  Permanent  Tribunal, and  will  maintain 
its  jurisdiction  in  the  respect  and  confidence  of  the  civilized 
world ; a moral  coercion  that  will,  as  Mr.  Morrow  has  said,  be 
better  than  the  executive  power  of  a sheriff ; a moral  coercion 
which  is  to-day  the  sanction  of  International  Law,  which  is  itself 
nothing  more  than  International  Morality ; a coercion  which 
keeps  you,  my  friends,  and  keeps  me  as  good  citizens,  at  Peace 
with  our  neighbors,  and  compels  us,  while  enjoying  our  rights, 
to  be  careful  that  we  do  not  infringe  on  those  of  others ; willing 
and  ready  to  demand  all  that  belongs  to  ourselves,  because  we 
are  willing  to  concede  all  that  belongs  to  another.  When  the 
principle  of  International  Arbitration  is  thus  maintained  by  the 
public  opinion  of  the  world,  as  it  surely  will  be,  I will  not  be 
much  concerned  as  to  the  fate  of  treaties  supplementary  to  The 
Hague  Convention,  by  which  nations  will  bind  themselves  to 
submit  controversies  of  all  kinds  to  that  Tribunal.  Whether  such 
treaties  are  negotiated  or  not,  this  moral  coercion  will  remain 
and  be  influential,  and  will  eventually  control  the  situation. 

In  this  view  what  difference  does  it  make  whether  we  have, 
or  have  not,  an  agreement  with  England,  that  we  will  submit  to 
arbitration,  at  The  Hague  Tribunal,  all  difficulties  that  may  arise 
in  the  future  between  us  ? When  the  difficulties  themselves  arise, 
public  opinion  will  compel  their  submission.  It  is  sometimes  a 
mistake  to  tie  two  peoples  too  strictly  together ; let  them  stand 
apart,  each  maintaining  his  own  self-respect,  and  the  guaranty 
for  peaceful  relations  may,  perhaps,  be  stronger  than  if  tied 
together  by  the  bond  of  international  treaties.  Irish  wit  has 
illustrated  this  thought  with  the  story  (and  with  this  I will 
close)  of  the  man  and  his  wife  who,  after  a pretty  stiff  quarrel 
between  them,  were  sitting,  one  on  each  side  of  the  fireplace. 
They  had  had  it  out,  and  had  gotten  tired,  and  sat  there  smoking 


353 

their  pipes.  A big  Newfoundland  dog  lay  between  them,  on  tne 
hearth,  with  a cat  curled  up  by  his  side.  Finally  “Pat”  said: 
“Bridget,  look  and  see  how  the  dog  and  cat  live  in  harmony; 
why  can’t  we  live  that  way  ?”  “Oh,”  said  she,  “tie  them  together, 
and  see  how  much  harmony  there  will  be.”  (Laughter  and 
applause.) 

Mr.  Low: 

I have  been  asked  to  say  that  messages  of  sympathy  and 
congratulation  have  been  received  from  the  King  of  Italy;  the 
King  of  Norway;  the  President  of  the  Swiss  Republic;  the 
Nobel  Prize  Committee  of  Norway’s  Parliament;  from  the 
Minister  of  Foreign  Affairs  in  the  Netherlands;  and  from  many 
organizations  abroad  and  at  home;  also,  that  resolutions  have 
been  adopted  by  the  legislature  of  the  State  of  New  York,  which 
will  be  presented,  I trust,  and  read  after  dinner  at  the  Waldorf 
this  evening,  by  the  Hon.  Sherman  Moreland,  the  leader  of  the 
Assembly. 

I have  now  the  pleasure  of  introducing,  as  the  last  speaker 
of  this  session  and  of  this  Congress,  a man  to  whom  all 
Americans  listen  with  interest,  and  whomi  many  Americans 
follow,  as  a natural  leader;  the  Hon.  William  Jennings  Bryan. 

The  Power  that  is  Greater  than  Force 

William  Jennings  Bryan 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : I enjoy  with 
you  the  rare  privilege  of  participating  in  this  Council,  the  object 
of  which  is  to  cultivate,  develop  and  strengthen  a sentiment  in 
favor  of  the  substitution  of  arbitration  and  investigation  for  war 
in  the  settlement  of  international  disputes.  This  is  not  an  official 
body;  we  represent  no  government,  and  because  we  represent  no 
government,  we  can  be  more  free  in  the  expression  of  our  views 
and  can  go  further  in  the  direction  of  Peace  than  an  official  body 
would  be  able  to  go  at  this  time. 

When  a man  speaks  for  millions  he  must  be  more  cautious 
than  when  he  speaks  for  himself ; for  he  may  not  be  sure  that  in 
speaking  for  a million  he  is  saying  what  the  millions  would  say, 
but  when  he  speaks  for  himself  he  knows  that  he  has  authority, 
at  least  from  one,  to  express  himself ; and  here  in  this  pioneer 


23 


354 

organization  he  can  express  the  hopes  that  are  entertained  by 
increasing  numbers  throughout  the  world,  that  the  time  is  not 
far  distant  when  man,  instead  of  settling  his  disputes  as  animals 
settle  their  differences,  will  settle  disputes  upon  the  basis  of 
intellect  and  brains  and  reason.  (Applause.) 

We  must  not  complain  if  when  we  read  what  is  said  here 
by  people  from  different  nations  we  detect  some  difference 
between  the  hopes  they  express  and  the  conduct  of  the  nations 
from  which  they  come.  It  is  not  strange  that  our  highest  ideals 
should  be  above  our  own  conduct;  for  unless  the  ideal  is  above 
us  it  is  not  an  inspiration,  it  does  not  lead  us  on. 

We  read  in  the  papers  that  in  the  South  American  Repub- 
lics they  have  many  revolutions,  and  yet  we  need  not  be  surprised 
to  learn,  as  we  have  learned  from  a distinguished  representative 
of  one  of  the  Spanish- American  states,  that  almost  a century  ago 
a great  Venezuelan  patriot  gave  to  his  people  the  very  ideals  of 
Peace  that  we  are  now  trying  to  develop  and  formulate. 

What  difference  does  it  make  if  the  people  who  live  in  the 
country  of  Bolivar  have  not  yet  risen  to  his  ideal?  They  are 
making  progress  towards  that.  We  understand  that  Germany 
keeps  a great  army,  because  she  is  afraid  that  France  may  attack 
her;  and  yet  we  need  not  be  surprised  to  learn  from  this  distin- 
guished representative  of  France,  who  has  made  his  name 
familiar  throughout  the  world  among  lovers  of  Peace, — we  need 
not  be  surprised  to  learn  from  him  that  his  nation  wants  Peace 
and  is  anxious  to  lead  in  the  Peace  Movement. 

We  have  heard  that  Germany  is  a menace  to  the  world,  and 
yet  we  need  not  be  surprised  to  learn  that  Germany  has  a War 
Lord  who  is,  as  we  are  told  by  the  distinguished  representatives 
of  Germany,  a friend  of  Peace  and  one  of  the  agencies  for  the 
promotion  of  Peace.  (Applause.) 

England,  we  are  informed,  has  a navy  that  all  the  other 
nations  fear,  and  this  great  navy  has  been  used  as  a reason  why 
other  nations  should  increase  their  navies ; and  yet  we  need  not 
be  surprised  to  hear  from  a distinguished  Englishman  that  King 
Edward  stands  among  the  foremost  of  the  Peace-makers  of  the 
world. 

Other  nations  may  be  surprised  at  the  fact  that  we  have 
more  than  doubled  our  army  in  the  last  ten  years,  that  we 
are  enlarging  our  navy,  and  that  we  are  spending  more  than  one 


355 

hundred  millions  a year  now  on  the  army  and  navy  in  excess  of 
what  we  spent  in  1898.  They  may  comment  on  that,  and  yet  we 
need  not  be  surprised  to  find  that  our  President  is  spoken  of  the 
world  around  as  a Peace-maker  and  that  our  nation  is  recog- 
nized as  a leader  in  this  effort  to  bring  about  Peace. 

I admit  that  there  are  some  seeming  inconsistencies 
(laughter  and  applause)  not  only  in  other  countries,  but  in  our 
country  as  well;  and  yet,  my  friends,  I long  since  learned  that 
inconsistencies  are  to  be  expected.  I am  not  kept  out  of  a 
Christian  church  because  Christians  live  lives  inconsistent  with 
the  Christian  religion.  I expect  that  Christians  will  fall  below 
the  ideal  presented  by  the  Man  of  Galilee,  for  it  is  the  glory  of 
the  Christian  ideal  that,  while  it  is  within  sight  of  the  weakest 
and  the  lowest,  it  is  yet  so  high  that  the  best  and  the  noblest 
are  kept  with  their  faces  turned  ever  upward.  (Applause.)  And 
the  Christian  civilization  is  the  greatest  that  the  world  has  known 
because  it  rests  upon  a conception  of  life  that  makes  life  one 
unending  struggle  for  better  things,  with  no  limit  to  human 
progress.  (Applause.)  We  must  always  expect  that  a high 
ideal  will  be  beyond  the  hope  of  realization.  Ask  a mother  who 
holds  in  her  arms  her  baby  boy  what  her  desire  is  concerning 
him,  and  she  will  tell  you  that  she  desires  that  his  heart  shall 
be  so  pure  that  it  can  be  laid  upon  a pillow  and  not  leave  a 
stain;  that  his  ambitions  shall  be  so  holy  that  he  could  whisper 
them  in  an  angel’s  ear;  and  that  his  life  shall  be  so  clean  that 
his  mother,  his  wife,  his  child,  might  read  the  record  of  his  every 
thought  and  act  without  a blush;  but  ask  her  if  she  expects  him 
to  realize  that  hope,  and  she  will  answer  no.  She  will  tell  you 
she  will  make  him  as  good  as  she  can,  that  wherever  he  wanders 
throughout  the  world  she  will  follow  his  every  footstep  with  a 
daily  prayer,  and  that  when  he  dies  she  will  hope,  hope,  yes, 
hope,  that  the  world,  at  least,  will  be  the  better  because  he  has 
lived.  (Applause.) 

That  is  all  we  can  do,  any  of  us.  Someone  has  said  that 
we  live  in  the  ideal  but  that  we  work  in  the  real.  And  so  we 
must  not  be  surprised  if  some  of  us  will  have  hopes  for  Peace 
that  even  this  Congress  will  not  be  willing  to  endorse. 

We  need  not  be  disappointed  if  some  of  the  resolutions  passed 
by  this  Congress  are  in  advance  of  what  our  nation  would 
propose.  We  need  not  be  surprised  if  our  nation  proposes 


356 

things  that  other  nations  will  not  agree  to.  Cherishing  our 
ideals,  we  must  do  the  best  we  can  with  the  material  we  have 
at  hand,  and  having  gained  one  step,  we  must  stand  there  until 
we  can  take  another  step.  Thus  has  all  progress  been  made. 

Three-quarters  of  a century  before  Emancipation  Thomas 
Jefferson,  looking  into  the  future,  said  that  nothing  was  more 
certain  than  that  the  slaves  would  be  free.  Abraham  Lincoln 
(applause)  only  five  years  and  a little  more  before  the  Eman- 
cipation Proclamation,  could  say  no  more  than  that  he  hoped  to 
see  slavery,  not  immediately  abolished,  but  in  process  of  ultimate 
extinction.  Thus  we  have  had  to  work  our  way  along,  and  this 
Congress  is  trying  to  do  what  it  can;  it  must  harmonize  differ- 
ences of  opinion,  for,  my  friends,  you  cannot  expect  that  people 
will  think  alike,  if  they  think  at  all.  (Laughter.)  When  you 
find  people  who  have  no  differences  you  will  find  people  who 
have  no  thought.  (Applause.)  It  is  easy  enough  for  a man  to 
have  a harmonious  party  when  he  is  the  only  member  of  it;  but 
he  must  expect  friction  if  he  permits  anybody  else  to  claim  the 
same  party  name  that  he  has.  Progress  comes  not  alone  from 
the  extreme ; it  results  from  a series  of  compromises  among  those 
who  want  progress  but  are  not  able  to  agree  upon  all  that  is 
proposed. 

Now,  there  are  several  things  in  these  resolutions  that  I 
might  call  attention  to,  but  time  does  not  permit;  and  there  are 
some  things  not  in  the  resolutions  that  I would  be  glad  to  see  in 
them. 

One  of  these  things  is  the  making  of  money  contraband 
of  war  like  powder  and  lead.  There  is  nothing  logical  in  saying 
that  a neutral  nation  shall  not  furnish  powder  and  shot  but  shall 
furnish  the  money  or  may  furnish  the  money  with  which  to  buy 
the  powder  and  the  shot.  (Applause.)  I hope  the  time  will 
come  when  we  shall  be  able  to  include  money  as  contraband  of 
war  and  thus  make  it  impossible  for  the  citizens  of  a neutral 
nation  to  grow  rich  by  encouraging  wars  between  other  nations. 
(Applause.) 

Another  thing  for  which  I hope  very  much  is  the  organi- 
zation of  a permanent  tribunal  that  will  hold  stated  sessions  so 
that  the  convening  of  the  body  will  not  depend  upon  the  initiative 
of  any  nation.  It  might  be  invoked,  under  conditions,  in  extra- 
ordinary session ; but  as  our  Congress  and  our  State  Legislatures 


357 

meet  at  stated  times,  I believe  that  this  great  International 
Tribunal  should  meet  at  stated  times  and  be  prepared  to  consider 
all  questions  that  may  be  brought  before  it  by  the  nations  of  the 
world.  (Applause.) 

Another  thing  that  I think  is  in  the  interest  of  Peace  is  the 
neutralization  of  territory.  I believe  that  the  more  we  can  get 
nations  to  agree  between  themselves  that  the  independence  of 
the  smaller  states  shall  be  respected,  the  further  off  we  will  push 
the  war  area  (applause)  ; but  I think  the  measure  in  which  I 
have  most  faith  is  the  measure  that  has  been  endorsed  in  the 
resolutions  adopted  here.  Let  me  read  it  to  you:  “Resolved: 
that  the  Congress  records  its  endorsement  of  resolutions  adopted 
by  the  Interparliamentary  Union  at  its  conference  last  July,  that 
in  case  of  disputes  arising  between  nations  which  it  may  not  be 
possible  to  embrace  within  the  terms  of  an  arbitration  conven- 
tion, the  disputing  parties  before  resorting  to  force,  shall  always 
invoke  the  services  of  an  International  Commission  of  Inquiry  or 
the  mediation  of  one  or  more  friendly  powers.” 

I believe  there  is  in  that  resolution  the  germ  of  more 
progress  in  the  direction  of  Peace  than  there  is  in  any  arbitra- 
tion treaty  that  was  ever  written.  The  trouble  with  our  arbi- 
tration treaties  is  that  they  do  not  include  the  most  important 
questions;  and  however  much  we  may  desire  the  coming  of  the 
time  when  all  questions  may  be  submitted  to  arbitration  we 
should  not  wait  for  that  time.  I believe  that  if  we  can  secure 
the  insertion  in  our  treaties  of  such  an  agreement  as  is  here 
proposed,  so  that  before  there  is  war,  before  hostilities  commence, 
there  shall  be  an  impartial  investigation  of  the  matters  in  dispute 
by  an  international  commission.  If  we  can  secure  this,  I believe 
that  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten  there  will  be  no  war.  (Applause.) 

There  are  two  reasons  that  I may  suggest  in  support  of  this 
resolution:  In  the  first  place,  it  gives  time  for  reflection,  time 
for  thought,  as  well  as  time  for  investigation ; and  I need  not 
tell  you  that  man  calm  is  an  entirely  different  animal  from  man 
excited.  When  man  is  excited  he  swaggers  around  and  tells 
you  what  he  can  do;  when  he  is  calm  he  tries  to  find  out  what 
he  ought  to  do.  When  he  is  excited  the  brute  instinct  prevails; 
when  he  is  calm,  the  conscience  restrains.  Investigation  gives 
time  for  people  to  think,  and  it  gives  time  for  the  cultivation  of 
a public  sentiment  that  will  operate  on  those  in  whose  hands  are 


358 

the  destinies  of  nations ; and  as  intelligence  increases,  as  informa- 
tion is  spread  more  rapidly,  that  time  becomes  more  valuable 
and,  I believe,  my  friends,  that  if  we  can  secure  investigations 
which  will  give  time  for  the  best  living  people  to  express  them- 
selves and  to  exert  themselves,  we  shall  almost  eliminate  war  as 
a possibility.  (Applause.) 

More  than  that,  investigation  enables  us  to  separate  mis- 
understandings from  differences,  and  we  all  know  that  between 
nations  as  between  individuals  the  greatest  difficulty  comes  from 
misunderstanding.  How  many  wars  can  you  recall  where  there 
was  a distinct  statement  of  the  causes  of  difference  before 
the  war  commenced?  How  many  wars  can  you  recall  in  which 
each  side  did  not  insist  that  it  was  a defensive  warfare  and 
that  the  other  party  was  the  attacking  party?  Have  an  inves- 
tigation and  let  these  investigations  separate  the  misunderstand- 
ings from  the  differences  and  when  you  have  eliminated  the 
misunderstandings  you  can  settle  the  differences  without  resort 
to  arms. 

What  objection  can  be  made?  I know  of  but  one, — well,  I 
might  suggest  two.  The  first  objection  is  that  there  might  be  a 
reason  for  war  that  the  nation  would  not  be  willing  to  disclose; 
but,  if  there  is  a nation  that  wants  to  go  to  war  for  a reason 
that  it  is  unwilling  to  disclose,  the  greater  reason  why  the  cause 
should  be  made  known,  that  the  contempt  of  the  world  might 
be  turned  upon  such  a nation.  (Applause.) 

The  other  reason  is  that  a question  may  arise  so  important 
that  you  ought  to  commence  shooting  each  other  before  you 
find  out  what  you  are  shooting  about.  (Laughter  and  applause.) 
But  I am  satisfied  that  no  intelligent  man  will  present  that  objec- 
tion to  this  plan.  Human  life  is  too  sacred  a thing  to  commence 
taking  before  you  have  resorted  to  all  possible  means  to  avoid  it ; 
and  if  this  Congress  does  nothing  else,  I am  glad  that  it  has  the 
courage  to  record  itself  on  this  proposition,  that  the  killing  of 
human  beings  shall  not  be  commenced  by  any  nation  until  the 
world  knows  what  crime  has  been  committed  that  requires  so 
high  a penalty.  (Applause.) 

One  of  the  objects  of  this  Congress  is  to  cultivate  a 
sentiment  that  will  advance  Peace,  and  one  of  the  things 
I think  we  should  try  to  cultivate  is  the  idea  that  it  is  not 
necessary  for  a man  to  die  on  the  battlefield  in  order  to  be 


359 

a patriot.  (Applause.)  Whatever  may  have  been  the  case  in 
times  past,  it  is  not  now  true  that  a man’s  patriotism  must  rest 
under  suspicion  until  he  has  shouldered  a gun  and  taken  a 
human  life,  and  this  Congress  will,  in  my  judgment,  not  do  its 
duty  unless  it  impresses  upon  the  world  that  it  is  as  glorious  for 
a man  to  live  for  his  country  as  to  die  for  it. 

Then,  too,  I believe  this  Congress  ought  to  present  the 
thought  that  there  is  a stronger  power  in  this  world  than  violence 
and  physical  force.  (Applause.)  There  is  a growing  conviction 
that  love  is  greater  than  force. 

In  this  very  city  I heard  a sermon  a few  years  ago  in  which 
the  minister,  Dr.  Parkhurst,  drew  a contract  between  force  and 
love.  He  said  the  hammer  represented  force,  that  with  the 
hammer  you  could  break  a piece  of  ice  in  a thousand  pieces,  but 
that  each  piece  would  still  be  ice;  but  that  if  you  would  allow  a 
ray  of  sunshine  to  fall  upon  that  block  of  ice,  acting  silently  and 
slowly,  it  would  at  last  melt  the  ice  and  there  would  be  ice  no 
more.  (Applause.)  And  so,  my  friends,  while  I am  glad  to 
have  the  Peace  Movement  supported  from  every  source  I expect 
most  of  the  progress  to  come  from  the  direction  of  love,  and 
not  from  the  direction  of  violence.  If  you  tell  me  that  you  can 
promote  Peace  by  building  navies  so  large  that  the  world  will  be 
scared  into  Peace,  I tell  you  I prefer  that  the  world  shall  be 
loved  into  Peace  and  that  affection  shall  bind  us  together. 

In  Paris  there  is  a magnificent  tomb  erected  in  honor  of  a 
great  warrior.  You  enter  the  building,  and  if  you  have  been 
thoughtless  enough  not  to  uncover  your  head  the  guard  tells  you 
that  the  hat  cannot  be  worn.  You  walk  around  and  examine  the 
standards  there,  you  see  the  names  of  the  battles  that  he  won 
and,  leaning  over  the  balustrade,  you  look  down  upon  a great 
sarcophagus  where  at  last  rests  the  body  of  that  past  master  in 
the  art  of  slaughter.  When  I was  starting  for  France  I went  to  a 
bookstore  in  this  city  and  secured  a copy  of  what  Ingersoll  said 
at  the  tomb  of  Napoleon.  I thought  it  was  a beautiful  thing  and 
I took  it  with  me  and  I thought  that  when  I had  to  write  a 
description  of  that  tomb,  I would  quote  these  words  that  I read 
in  my  youth  and  have  often  recalled  since ; but  when  I visited  the 
tomb  something  impressed  me  even  more  than  the  words  of 
Ingersoll;  for,  after  looking  over  at  that  sarcophagus,  my  eyes 
rested  upon  a crucifix  above  and  just  beyond,  and  I saw  one  of 


36o 

the  world’s  greatest  warriors  sleeping  at  the  foot  of  the  Prince 
of  Peace,  and  it  seemed  to  me  that,  whether  intended  or  not,  the 
bringing  of  these  two  into  that  position  gave  the  lesson  to  the 
world  that,  after  all,  Love  is  greater  than  Force,  and  this  raising 
of  the  crucified  Christ  above  this  war  god  typifies  the  coming 
of  the  day  when  man  will  find  his  glory  in  doing  good  and  his 
ideal  in  the  service  of  mankind.  (Applause.) 

Mr.  Low : 

I have  to  say  that  the  resolutions  which  have  been  adopted 
by  the  Congress  have  been  printed  and  that  you  can  get  a copy 
of  them.  This  Congress  began  its  work  under  the  auspices  of 
the  Minister  of  the  Christian  religion,  and  owing  to  the  sugges- 
tion of  Rabbi  Pereira  Mjendes,  the  session  shall  be  brought  to  a 
close  by  the  use  of  the  words  of  the  benediction  of  Israel : “The 
Lord  give  thee  Peace.”  Rabbi  Pereira  Mendes  then  pronounced 
the  benediction. 


THE  LIBRARY 
OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


v.?;: 


! V ISIS 

M5U£  P^t.^,C£  . Mfc£ri***0  Pt<i,CE.  Df  '«£  fiftsi  Pt\t.t  CoNone^s 


/<>  /?'  *//***'+*  s*/Y/i* 


y/t 


y *' 

4-tsr.  /A /f/t/,  r/^'Arjf'A 

// 

AA*e<*€4)/en£ 


//<?* 


/Af  //f  ^AjAeAVt 

,ALr,„AA  AA^^/S^ 


A>.  AAsA. 

AAA&A&r£  A>.  A>Ay.' 


~Atw</.ux,y,  <AAu*m e //.  A/t* 
?AA?/*>  ■/  zSAi/O’r' 


’t4*m  w «*•>?, 


36 1 


THE  BANQUET  OF  THE  NATIONAL 
ARBITRATION  AND  PEACE 
CONGRESS 

Hotel  Astor 

Wednesday  Evening,  April  Seventeenth 
MR.  ANDREW  CARNEGIE  Presiding 
Mr.  Carnegie: 

Please  come  to  order.  I am  to  report  to  you  that  the 
banquet  at  the  Waldorf,  with  quite  as  many  as  we  have  here, 
is  proceeding  splendidly.  (Applause.)  They  are  having  a really 
good  time,  and  of  course  I sent  them  word  that  I hoped  they 
were,  because  the  time  that  we  were  having  had  never  been 
excelled  in  New  York.  I wanted  to  have  our  end  kept  up  as 
much  as  theirs.  (Applause.) 

Now,  there  is  to  be  an  exchange  of  speakers.  Two  of  our 
most  distinguished  speakers  go  down  there  after  speaking  to  you, 
and  two  of  their  most  important  speakers  come  here.  A fair 
exchange  is  no  robbery.  (Laughter.) 

Ladies  and  gentlemen,  we  have  with  us  to-night  the  repre- 
sentative of  His  Majesty,  King  Edward.  (Applause.)  You 
know  that  past  kings  of  Britain  used  to  conquer  their  enemies 
on  the  Continent.  His  Majesty  conquers  his  friends  there. 
(Applause.)  He  is  a great  messenger  of  Peace  wherever  he 
travels,  and  I want  you  Republicans  here  to  understand  that 
there  is  behind  the  King,  a man  (applause),  and  a man  of  Peace. 
He  is  represented  upon  this  side  of  the  Atlantic  by  one  of  whom 
it  is  difficult  to  speak  in  terms  of  moderation.  (Applause.)  It 
was  my  good  fortune  to  know  him  long  before  he  came  here  to 
represent  his  sovereign,  in  the  days  when  he  represented  himself ; 
and  we  have,  in  Earl  Grey,  Governor  General  of  Canada,  one  of 
the  men  of  the  earth  who  deserves  to  rank  in  the  very  foremost 
ranks  of  those  who  carry  Peace  and  Good-will  to  their  brethren 
wherever  they  may  be.  I have  great  pleasure  in  calling  upon  His 
Excellency  to  address  you. 


362 

Earl  Grey  : 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  and  Mr.  Carnegie  : That  sounded 
almost  like  a military  note.  (Laughter.)  I hope  Mir.  Carnegie 
does  not  expect  me  to  speak,  for  the  few  minutes  during  which  I 
shall  engage  your  attention,  in  sympathy  with  the  prelude  which 
has  been  played  by  his  trumpeter.  (Laughter.) 

I desire,  Mr.  Carnegie,  if  I may  do  so,  to  offer  you,  whom 
I have  long  known  as  a great  race  imperialist  (Laughter.  Mr. 
Carnegie  said  “Hear!  Hear!”),  to  offer  you  my  hearty  congratu- 
lations upon  this  distinguished  assembly  that  you  have  convened. 
(Cries  of  “Hear!  Hear!”) 

I have  been  asked  by  some  of  my  friends  what  is  the  use  of 
attending  a Peace  Congress?  What  effect  will  the  speeches  and 
resolutions  passed  by  that  Congress  have  upon  the  executive 
governments  who  are  face  to  face  with  the  duty  of  safeguarding 
their  peoples  against  the  possible  invasion  of  predatory  foes? 
Well,  Mr.  Carnegie,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  those  of  you  who 
have  been  able  to  attend  the  meetings  which  have  taken  place 
during  the  last  week  and  to  witness  the  enthusiasm  which 
they  invoked  will  have  a pretty  conclusive  answer  to  give  to  any 
such  question  that  may  be  addressed  to  you.  (Applause  and 
cries  of  “Hear!  Hear!”) 

But  I also  received  what  seemed  to  me  to  be  a full  and 
conclusive  answer  on  my  way  here  in  the  train  last  night.  I 
was  traveling  in  a car  which  received  its  light  from  power 
generated  by  the  rapid  revolution  of  the  wheels.  There  appeared 
to  be  a fixed  and  definite  relation  between  the  train  and  the 
illumination  of  the  car.  (Laughter.)  When  the  speed  of  the 
train  was  below  twenty-five  miles  an  hour,  the  lamp  gave  so 
faint  a light  that  it  was  almost  impossible  to  read,  but  as  soon 
as  the  speed  indicator  pointed  to  twenty-seven  miles  an  hour,  a 
difference  of  only  eight  per  cent,  the  dull  carbon  suddenly,  and 
without  a moment’s  warning,  burst  from  the  state  of  its  depressing 
dullness  into  a dazzling  and  glorious  illumination  which  made 
the  interior  of  my  car  as  light  as  day.  Now,  this  seems  to  me 
to  be  the  way  which  the  train  had  of  expressing  its  agreement 
with  the  dictum  of  Mr.  Straus,  that  disarmament  is  an  effect, 
and  not  a cause,  and  with  the  declaration  of  Mr.  Root,  that  it 
is  the  desires  and  the  impulses  of  mankind  on  which  the  issues 


363 

of  Peace  and  war  depend.  Now,  gentlemen,  it  is  the  realization 
of  this  truth,  that  a little  more  enthusiasm,  and  a little  more 
faith,  just  five  per  cent,  or  eight  per  cent.,  will  make  a new  illumi- 
nation which  will  suddenly  bring  upon  us  the  brightness  of 
Universal  Peace,  which  makes  this  Congress  and  the  influence 
that  radiates  from  it,  a matter  of  prime  importance.  We  have 
to  deal  not  with  governments,  but  with  peoples  of  the  world, 
and  if  we  can  increase  their  enthusiasm  for  the  sacred  cause  of 
Peace,  by  so  little  as  the  difference  between  twenty-five  and 
twenty-seven,  by  which  my  car  went  from  darkness  into  light, 
then  this  Congress  cannot  fail  to  mark  a very  great  influence  for 
good  on  the  peoples  of  the  world.  (Great  applause.)  I am 
afraid  that  I have  worked  that  out  very  badly,  ladies  and 
gentlemen,  but  let  us  remember  that  it  is  in  the  power  of  every 
single  individual,  no  matter  to  what  country  he  may  belong,  to 
add  to  that  store  of  energy  on  which  our  illumination  depends, 
and  that  there  will  come  a moment  when  the  addition  of  one 
solitary  unit  will  be  sufficient  to  convert  our  darkness  into  light. 
(Applause  and  cries  of  “Hear ! Hear !”) 

Now,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  I once  asked  an  American  lady, 
whose  son  had  made  an  unfortunate  marriage,  whether  she  had 
quarreled  with  her  daughter-in-law.  (Laughter.)  And  I have 
never  forgotten  her  reply.  “My  dear  young  friend,’’  she  said, 
“have  you  not  yet  learned  that  it  is  only  uneducated  people  who 
quarrel”?  (Laughter.)  Now,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  I under- 
stand it  has  been  the  object  of  this  Congress  to  educate  the 
peoples  of  the  world  up  to  the  level  of  this  American  lady’s 
understanding.  (Laughter.) 

Now,  in  fair  and  growing  Canada,  in  whose  delightful 
Dominion  it  is  my  privilege  to  live  (applause),  the  people 
have  already,  through  the  action  of  their  parliamentary  repre- 
sentatives, shown  that  they,  like  the  American  lady  to  whom  I 
have  referred,  have  realized  that  it  is  only  barbarous  and 
uneducated  people  who  prefer  the  quarrel  of  the  sword  to  the 
peaceful  methods  of  arbitration  as  a means  of  settling  inter- 
national disputes.  (Applause.) 

The  people  of  Canada  have  recently  enacted  a law  which 
has  made  it  an  offence  for  the  forces  of  capital  and  labor  to 
resort  either  to  a lockout  or  a strike  without  first  having  a 
preliminary  investigation  into  the  subject  of  dispute.  (Applause.) 


364 

And  I am  very  glad  to  be  able  to  inform  you  that  although  that 
act  came  into  force  only  on  March  22nd,  and  is  therefore  not 
yet  a month  old,  already,  on  three  separate  occasions,  has  an 
industrial  war,  which,  but  for  that  act,  would  have  engendered 
feelings  of  angry  bitterness,  would  have  arrested  the  peaceful 
development  of  the  arts  of  industry,  and  would  have  left  a train 
of  starvation  and  suffering  in  the  homes  of  thousands,  that  such 
an  industrial  war  has  on  three  separate  occasions  been  averted. 
(Applause.) 

And  I have  word  to-night,  through  a telegram  I have 
received,  since  I came  into  this  room,  that  in  British  Columbia 
a formidable  strike  which  had  already  been  voted  upon  by 
twenty-seven  hundred  miners,  who  represented  five  collieries, 
and  whose  output  affected  industries  employing  five  thou- 
sand additional  workers,  all  of  whom  would  by  the  strike 
have  been  put  out  of  employment  also,  that  these  men  had 
received  instructions  to  go  back  to  their  work,  because  they  had 
struck  in  ignorance  of  the  law  that  had  been  passed  which  had 
required  them  to  suspend  any  decision  as  to  whether  they  should 
go  out  on  strike  until  the  subject  of  their  dispute  with  their 
employers  had  received  the  investigation  of  a board  of  concilia- 
tion and  investigation.  (Applause.)  Now,  I say,  why  should  not 
we  apply  to  international  disputes  the  principle  of  this  Canadian 
Act  which  forbids  men  to  draw  the  sword  until  after  a round- 
table conference  has  taken  place?  (Applause  and  cries  of  “Hear! 
Hear!”)  I would  respectfully  suggest,  Mr.  Carnegie,  that  the 
nations  might  adopt,  as  an  international  principle,  the  principle 
which  Canada,  to  her  great  advantage,  has  adopted  as  an 
internal  regulation.  (Applause  and  cries  of  “Hear!  Hear!”) 

I am  aware  that  it  is  useless  to  enact  a law  unless  a penalty 
is  enforced  upon  those  by  whom  such  a law  is  wantonly  disre- 
garded. Well,  a penalty  has  been  suggested,  which  is  within  the 
power  of  the  various  legislatures  of  the  civilized  world,  either 
singly  or  collectively,  to  propose.  It  is  within  the  power  of 
every  legislature  that  wishes  to  promote  Peace,  to  enact  that  it 
shall  be  illegal  for  their  subjects  to  furnish  a war  loan  to  any 
nation  that  begins  hostilities  without  first  coming  to  the  round 
table  of  the  Hague  Tribunal  in  accordance  with  the  recom- 
mendations of  Article  VIII  of  the  Hague  Convention. 
(Applause.)  Why  should  not  the  legislatures  pronounce  a 


365 

financial  boycott  against  the  nation  which  draws  the  sword 
before  submitting  its  grievance  in  view  of  all  the  world,  to  the 
independent  and  impartial  searchlight  of  the  Hague  Tribunal? 
(Applause.)  This  would  appear  to  be  a first  step,  which  is  well 
within  the  reach  of  every  legislature,  and  one  which,  once 
adopted,  would  lead,  by  gradual  and  sure  results,  to  the  realiza- 
tion, Mr.  Carnegie,  of  all  the  hopes  which  you  and  your  friends 
so  fondly  entertain.  (Applause  and  cries  of  “Hear!  Hear!”) 

I should  like,  with  your  permission,  ladies  and  gentlemen, 
to  tell  you  the  author,  so  far  as  I know,  of  this  suggestion  of  using 
the  financial  boycott  as  a means  of  averting  war.  After  the  death 
of  Mr.  Cecil  Rhodes,  a most  interesting  document  was  found 
among  his  papers.  This  document  was  written  in  the  year  1875, 
when  he  was  a lad  of  twenty-two.  It  was  written  when  he  was 
trekking  on  the  boundless  plateau  of  South  Africa  and  sleeping 
under  the  stars ; inspired  by  his  surroundings  he  penned  in  school- 
boy handwriting  his  confession  of  faith,  and  his  wishes  as  to  the 
way  in  which  he  desired  that  the  money  he  might  leave  behind 
him  after  his  death  should  be  employed.  After  pointing  out  in 
this  remarkable  confession  that  happiness  was  to  be  found,  not  in 
self-indulgence,  but  in  the  conscious  pursuit  of  a noble  purpose, 
he  gave  expression  to  his  regret  that  the  United  States  and  the 
United  Kingdom  had  ever  parted  political  company;  and  the 
reason  that  he  gave  for  his  regret  was  this : that  had  they 
remained  united  it  would  have  been  in  their  power,  by  a single 
act — by  the  refusal  of  supplies' — to  have  prevented  the  Russo- 
Turkish  war,  which  was  then  going  on.  (Applause.)  And  he 
concluded  in  this  document  with  a bequest,  of  all  the  money  of 
which  he  might  die  possessed,  to  a friend  for  the  formation  of 
a society  which  should  use  its  efforts  for  the  reunion  of  the  United 
States  and  the  United  Kingdom  in  the  interest  of  Universal  Peace. 
(Applause.) 

Now,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  the  Oxford  scholarships  which 
Mr.  Rhodes,  by  his  will,  presented  to  everyone  of  your  States, 
are  a standing  expression  of  his  desire  to  bring  the  peoples  of  the 
English-speaking  world  into  closer  and  more  intimate  relations, 
and  of  his  belief  that  if  the  two  great  powers,  the  American 
Republic  and  the  British  Crown,  were  united  in  a defensive  policy 
of  Peace,  as  well  as  they  are  in  religion,  traditions,  language  and 


366 

inspiration,  that  important  advances  toward  the  civilization  and 
Peace  of  the  world  would  be  secured.  (Applause.) 

Now,  if  I am  not  taking  up  too  much  time,  I should  like  to 
say  that  a short  time  ago  Canada  was  honored  by  a visit  from 
Mr.  Root,  and  it  was  my  privilege  to  attend  a banquet  given 
in  his  honor  at  Ottawa,  and  I shall  never,  so  long  as  I retain 
my  memory,  forget  the  emotion  which  brought  a lump  to  my 
throat  and  to  that  of  everyone  else  present,  when  Mr.  Root 
dwelt  in  earnest  and  impressive  tones  upon  the  great  fact  that 
the  two  nations,  animated  by  the  feeling  of  mutual  respect  and 
good-will,  were  pursuing  the  same  ideals  of  liberty  and  justice 
side  by  side ; and  that  along  the  whole  length  of  the  three  thou- 
sand miles  of  frontier  that  divided  us  there  was  not  one  single 
sentinel  to  give  expression  to  any  more  thought  of  fear  of  hostili- 
ties than  if  we  had  been  one  and  the  same  people.  (Applause.) 

Mr.  Root  also  reminded  us  that  within  a few  years,  eight 
years  from  now,  we  shall  be  able  to  celebrate  the  centennial  anni- 
versary of  a hundred  years  of  peaceful  fellowship,  a hundred 
years  during  which  no  part  of  the  brains  of  industry  and  enter- 
prise have  been  diverted  from  the  building  up  of  happy  and 
peaceful  homes,  to  be  squandered  in  warlike  attack  by  one  people 
upon  the  other.  Now,  gentlemen,  this  is  an  allusion  to  the  years 
1812  and  1814,  if  you  will  excuse  me,  as  Mr.  Carnegie  tells 
me  I may  speak  about  anything  I like,  though  I represented  to  him 
that  it  might  be  very  difficult,  after  all  that  has  been  said  dur- 
ing the  week,  for  me  to  add  a single  sentiment  or  thought  for 
your  consideration.  I will  make  mention  of  one  other  experi- 
ence, with  reference  to  the  year  1812,  which  comes  to  my 
mind.  About  this  time  last  year  I was  taken  down  the  waters 
of  the  stately  Potomac  on  a government  vessel;  and  when  our 
vessel  fronted  the  historic  mansion  of  Mount  Vernon,  the  vessel 
saluted,  the  flag  was  dipped,  the  company  of  soldiers  on  board 
presented  arms,  the  bugle  sounded,  and  as  we  stood  with  our 
heads  bowed  and  bared,  I should  hardly  have  been  surprised — 
I do  not  think  any  of  us  would  have  been  surprised — if  we  had 
seen  the  coffin  of  the  first  President  emerging  from  the  door. 
But  affected,  as  we  all  were  by  the  scene,  I was  even  more  affected 
when  I was  informed  that  the  first  vessel  to  dip  its  flag  in  honor 
of  George  Washington  was  a British  vessel  in  1814,  when  the 
United  Kingdom  and  the  United  States  were  unhappily  at  war. 


367 

(Applause.)  Now,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  this  feeling  of  respect, 
this  loving  admiration  for  all  that  is  best  in  American  character, 
which  was  felt  by  the  British  captain  when  his  country  was  at 
war  with  the  United  States,  beats  as  strongly  in  the  bosoms  of 
Canadians  and  Englishmen  to-day,  and  more  strongly  after  the 
lapse  of  a hundred  years  of  Peace.  (Applause.)  The  year  of 
1912  I hope  will  be  celebrated  on  both  sides  of  the  frontier 
as  a centennial  of  Peace,  of  a hundred  years  of  peaceful  fel- 
lowship. 1812  is  a date  which  is  sacred  to  the  memory  of 
all  Canadians,  for  the  spirit  of  the  French  Canadians  and  the 
Loyalists  is  as  sacred  to  the  Canadians  as  the  memory  of  your 
Pilgrim  Fathers.  On  that  occasion  they  saved  their  country 
from  a compulsory  incorporation  by  force  of  arms  in  the  body 
politic  of  the  United  States;  and  we  stand  to-day,  both  the 
Canadians  and  the  people  of  the  United  States,  based  upon  a most 
noble  origin.  Our  high  traditions  almost  compel  us  to  be  the 
foremost  champions  of  freedom  and  of  Christian  duty.  We  both 
represent  nations  which  have  been  founded  on  the  basis  of  self- 
sacrifice.  That  the  Puritan  leaven  which  came  from  across  the 
Atlantic  with  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  will  never  cease  to  animate 
and  inspire  your  people  is  the  constant  prayer  of  all  who  have 
at  heart  the  well-being  of  humanity  and  Peace  of  the  world. 
(Applause.)  It  is  also  to  be  hoped  that  the  virtues  which  caused 
nearly  5,000  souls  in  1784,  following  loftier  and  higher  ideals 
than  those  of  mere  material  success,  to  abandon  their  comfort- 
able homes  in  the  United  States  and  march  into  the  northern 
wilderness,  with  no  other  equipment  except  the  Tables  of  the 
Ten  Commandments,  which  they  took  with  them  from  their 
church,  Trinity  Church  at  the  head  of  Wall  Street, — I trust  that 
the  same  virtues  which  animated  them  may  ever  remain  the 
inspiring  and  abiding  characteristics  of  the  Canadian  people. 
We  are  two  peoples  founded  on  these  origins  of  disinterested 
enthusiasm,  which  in  their  traditions,  furnish  a perfect  example 
to  stimulate  us  to  lead  stricter  lives  of  high  and  noble  endeavor. 
We  owe  a duty  to  our  fathers  that  begot  us  to  give  an  example 
of  disinterestedness  to  the  world,  and  the  call  that  has  been  made 
to  us  to  co-operate  in  the  cause  which  aims  at  the  substitution 
of  arbitration  for  the  sword  in  the  settlement  of  international 
disputes  is  a call  which  I am  confident  will  not  be  made  in  vain 
on  whichever  side  of  the  frontier  we  may  live;  and  I close 


368 

these  remarks  with  a renewed  expression  of  hope,  not  only  as  a 
Rhodes  Trustee,  but  in  the  name  of  peaceful  people,  that  the 
Hague  Conference  will  not  be  prorogued  until  it  has  established 
rules  which  will  apply  to  the  conduct  of  international  disputes 
the  same  principle  which  during  the  last  month  has  on  three 
separate  occasions  secured  the  industrial  Peace  of  Canada  by 
averting  industrial  war.  (Applause.) 

And  now  I thank  you,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  for  the  kind 
way  in  which  you  have  listened  to  my  remarks,  and  I shall  have 
great  pleasure  in  reading  to  you  the  telegram  which  I received 
this  evening  from  Senator  Dandurand,  the  Speaker  of  the  Senate 
of  the  Dominion,  in  Ottawa.  He  telegraphed  me  as  follows: 
“A  Canadian  group  of  members  of  Parliament,  numbering  one 
hundred  and  fifty,  was  formed  this  morning  and  have  joined 
the  Interparliamentary  Union  for  Peace.  (Applause.)  They 
send  greetings  to  their  American  cousins,  who  are  working 
toward  the  same  end.”  (Applause.)  I wish,  Mr.  Carnegie,  the 
telegram  had  been  a little  more  explicit.  Members  of  the  Senate 
are  also  Members  of  Parliament.  I should  like  to  have  known 
whether  those  one  hundred  and  fifty  Members  of  Parliament 
which  by  friend,  Senator  Dandurand,  tells  me  about  belonged 
entirely  to  the  House  of  Commons  or  whether  they  belonged 
to  the  two  Houses  of  the  Legislature.  The  total  number  of  our 
Senators  and  of  our  Members  of  the  House  of  Commons  does  not 
exceed  three  hundred,  from  which  you  will  see  that  you  have  a 
majority  of  the  two  Houses  in  favor  of  the  principles  for  which, 
Mr.  Carnegie,  you  have  worked  so  hard.  I thank  you.  (Great 
applause.) 

Mr.  Carnegie: 

After  such  an  encouraging  message  from  our  neighbor  on 
the  North,  I tell  you  that  if  our  English-speaking  race  does 
not,  through  its  delegates  appearing  at  the  Hague  Conference, 
have  something  of  vital  importance  to  say,  somebody  is  very 
much  to  blame.  (Applause.) 

Ladies  and  gentlemen,  you  have  heard  from  our  great  neigh- 
bor, our  great  and  prosperous  neighbor  in  the  North.  Remem- 
ber, we  have  a great  and  prosperous  neighbor  in  the  South  (ap- 
plause), a republic  that  cannot  boast  as  long  a history  as  our 
Canadian  friend,  but  one  that  has  made  such  rapid  progress  in 


369 

the  life  of  one  man  as  to  challenge  our  admiration.  We  have 
in  President  Diaz  one  of  the  great  leaders  of  men.  He  has  made 
a republic  that  has  taken  a position  on  the  face  of  the  earth  with 
other  nations.  And  only  the  other  day  he  joined  with  President 
Roosevelt  through  his  ambassador  here  and  prevented  war 
between  four  South  American  republics — actually  prevented  it. 
This  foretells  the  day  when  we,  on  this  continent,  will  unite  with 
Canada  and  Mexico  and  other  republics  below  and  will  tell  the 
smaller  republics  that  no  nation  on  this  continent  can  be  allowed 
to  disturb  the  general  peace  in  which  all  other  nations  on  this  con- 
tinent are  greatly  interested.  That  is  to  be  the  solution  of  this 
question  of  Peace,  in  my  humble  opinion.  (Applause.)  Ladies 
and  gentlemen,  we  have  with  us  to-night  the  ambassador  of  that 
dear  neighbor  on  the  South,  and  I wish  to  present  to  you — and 
have  the  greatest  pleasure  in  so  doing — His  Excellency  Senor 
Don  Enrique  Creel,  who  will  now  address  you.  (Applause.) 

Senor  Don  Enrique  Creel  : 

His  Excellency  General  Porfirio  Diaz,  President  of  the 
Mexican  Republic,  wishes  to  express  his  feeling  of  high  appre- 
ciation for  the  honor  and  courtesy  of  your  invitation  to  him,  and 
he  regrets  exceedingly  that  on  account  of  his  official  duties, 
Congress  now  being  in  session,  he  could  not  be  present  at  the 
meetings  of  the  National  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress,  and 
at  this  magnificent  banquet.  He  has  honored  me  with  his  high 
representation  and  has  asked  me  to  convey  to  you  his  sympathy 
for  the  good  work  which  you  are  doing  in  behalf  of  the  most 
noble  ideal  which  humanity  can  pursue. 

Peace  by  arbitration  is  the  great  conquest  that  civilization 
has  to  make,  and  every  effort,  every  move,  every  study,  every 
investigation  and  every  conference  on  these  lines  is  a step  for- 
ward to  accomplish  the  great  ideal  and  should  be  received  with 
cheers  by  all  of  the  rulers  of  the  world,  as  it  means  the  labor 
to  perfect  the  scientific  structure  of  Peace  Tribunals,  and 
as  it  is  the  seed  which  is  being  deposited  in  the  heart  of  the 
human  family  and  whose  growth  and  fruit,  by  education,  the 
coming  generations  will  enjoy. 

We  all  realize  the  many  difficulties  which  are  in  the  way,  not 
so  much  to  have  the  principle  accepted  in  its  high  and  broad 
views  and  proper  limitations,  as  to  territory  and  national  honor; 


24 


370 

but  to  establish  the  World’s  Tribunal  of  Peace,  free  of  political 
or  any  other  influence,  and  inspiring  full  and  complete  confidence 
in  every  country  on  both  continents. 

The  proper  organization  of  such  a high  tribunal  is  a subject 
which  should  be  given  the  most  careful  consideration,  as  it  is 
the  basis,  the  real  foundation  on  which  good  or  bad  results 
will  have  to  stand.  It  is  best  to  know  what  the  main  diffi- 
culties are,  so  as  to  overcome  them  by  wisdom,  thought,  pru- 
dence and  determination. 

All  of  this  will  be  accomplished,  we  hope,  by  the  continual 
and  persevering  work  of  men  of  noble  altruistic  feelings  like 
yourselves,  by  public  opinion  and  by  rulers  whose  policy  is  one 
of  Peace  and  justice.  It  will  also  be  supported,  beyond  any 
doubt,  by  the  education  of  the  people  to  higher  and  higher 
standards  of  intellectuality,  justice  and  morality. 

The  initiative  of  one  of  the  great  rulers  of  the  world  in 
establishing  the  Hague  Conference ; the  response  of  the  Powers ; 
the  philanthropic  gift  of  one  of  the  best  men  of  the  human  family 
for  a perpetual  palace  for  the  Hague  Tribunal;  the  work  of 
this  honorable  National  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress,  and 
other  similar  institutions,  the  lectures  of  scientific  men  and  the 
advances  in  public  education,  are  all  important  factors  for  the 
success  of  international  arbitration. 

It  is  very  gratifying  to  notice  the  great  progress  which  has 
been  made  in  the  sound  promotion  and  advancement  of  the  prin- 
ciple of  arbitration ; how  strong  public  opinion  is  becoming 
to  support  it  and  how  bright  and  promising  the  outlook  is  for 
this  holy  and  sacred  cause  of  humanity. 

For  what  has  already  been  accomplished,  allow  me,  Mr. 
Chairman,  to  congratulate  you  in  the  name  of  President  Diaz, 
and,  through  you,  the  members  of  the  National  Arbitration  and 
Peace  Congress. 

I also  want  to  enjoy  the  high  privilege  of  presenting  to  you 
(the  speaker  turning  to  Mr.  Carnegie)  the  warm  congratulations 
of  all  of  the  many  ladies  attending  this  brilliant  banquet,  and 
the  gentlemen  of  the  different  nationalities,  for  your  high  respect 
and  love  for  the  principles  of  justice.  (Applause.)  Together 
with  those  congratulations,  I may  say  that  your  name  has  been 
pronounced  by  millions  and  millions  of  people  of  the  American 
continent  and  of  the  European  continent  with  high  respect  and 


From  Stereograph,  Copyright  1907,  by  Underwood  & Underwood,  New  York. 

His  Excellency  Don  Enrique  C.  Creel  His  Excellency  James  Bryce 

His  Excellency  Earl  Grey 

Sir  Edward  Elgar  Mr.  J.  M.  W.  Van  der  Poorten  Schwartz 

(“Maarten  Maartens  ” ) 


THE  LIBRARY 
OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  GF  ILLINOIS 


371 

great  appreciation  for  your  good  work.  (Applause.)  And  I 
cannot  help  thinking  on  this  occasion  of  those  who  are  absent, 
of  those  who  have  died  on  the  battlefields,  of  the  millions  of 
souls,  who,  through  the  ages,  will  send  you  the  message  of  love, 
the  message  of  high  appreciation,  the  message  of  their  con- 
gratulations and  of  high  gratitude  for  your  good  and  noble  work. 
(Applause.) 

Ladies  and  gentlemen,  His  Excellency  the  President  of  the 
United  States  of  America  is  one  of  the  great  peace-makers  of 
the  world.  (Applause  and  cries  of  “Hear!  Hear!”)  His  letter 
to  the  National  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress  has  opened  new 
fields  and  has  established  new  hopes  at  which  we  all  should 
rejoice,  and  at  this  happy  moment,  when  we  all  pray  for  Peace 
and  Arbitration,  let  us  drink  his  health,  the  health  of  President 
Roosevelt.  (Great  applause.) 

Mr.  Carnegie: 

To  the  health  of  the  President  of  the  United  States.  All 
stand  and  drink. 

(The  audience  all  rose  and  drank  the  toast  amid  cheers.) 

Mr.  Carnegie: 

It  seems  like  an  act  of  supererogation  to  introduce  the 
next  speaker  to  any  assembly  of  English-speaking  men  in  any 
part  of  the  world.  (Applause.)  If  there  be  one  objection  to  him 
it  is,  that  he  knows  too  much  about  us.  (Applause.)  There 
is  no  use  in  trying  to  put  on  a good  face.  There  is  no  use  in 
trying  to  dissemble,  to  hide  our  few  faults,  or  to  expose  our 
numerous  virtues.  This  man  knows  them  all  better  than  most 
of  us,  and  he  is  here  representing  His  Majesty  from  Great 
Britain,  as  Earl  Grey  is  representing  him  from  Canada.  I will 
say  nothing  more  about  him,  for  every  intelligent  man  and  woman 
knows  him.  (Applause.)  I have  great  pleasure  in  introducing 
to  you  the  Right  Honorable  James  Bryce,  Ambassador  Extra- 
ordinary from  his  Britannic  Majesty  to  the  United  States. 
(Great  applause.) 

Mr.  Bryce: 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  First,  let  me 
thank  you  for  the  great  kindness  of  your  reception.  I cannot 
tell  you  how  deeply  I feel  the  kindness  with  which  here,  and 


372 

on  many  other  occasions,  I have  been  received  in  this  country. 
To  me  it  is  not  a foreign  country.  I feel  that  I am  among 
friends.  (Applause.)  Ladies  and  gentlemen,  let  me  say  at 
once  that  it  is  a great  pleasure  to  see  so  many  ladies  here  to-night. 
(Applause  and  laughter.)  I pass  over  the  other  reasons 
(laughter),  but  I say  it  is  a great  pleasure  to  know  that  women 
are  throwing  their  influence,  as  they  ought  to  throw  it,  and  it  is 
a powerful  influence,  upon  the  cause  which  brings  us  together. 
Now,  Mr.  Carnegie,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  this  is  the  end  of  the 
fourth  day,  on  which  able  speakers,  distinguished  men  from  both 
sides  of  the  ocean,  have  been  descanting  on  the  horror  and  the 
folly  of  war  and  upon  the  blessings  of  Peace.  There  has  been 
a great  array  of  authority  on  the  side  of  Peace.  You  have 
printed  in  the  paper  distributed  to  us  to-night  a list  of  extracts 
from  every  President  of  the  United  States,  culminating  in  the 
one  from  your  present  President,  who  has  also  sent  a message 
of  sympathy  to  this  Congress,  and  who  is  like  my  own  Sovereign 
and  like  the  Canadian  Sovereign,  King  Edward  VII,  a true  friend 
of  Peace.  (Applause.) 

Let  me  add  that  it  is  with  the  greatest  pleasure  that  we 
have  received  the  further  testimony  which  has  been  given  by  my 
friend  and  colleague,  the  Ambassador  of  Mexico  from  the  dis- 
tinguished President  of  that  great  state.  (Applause.) 

We  have  also  had  a great  weight  of  argument  in  favor  of 
Peace.  Members  of  this  Congress  have  shown  to  one  another’s 
satisfaction  that  war  is  irrational,  that  it  is  immoral,  that  it  is 
unphilosophical,  that  it  is  unchristian ; and  they  have  also  shown, 
which  perhaps  it  is  well  to  do  in  a commercial  center  like 
New  York,  that  it  is  unprofitable.  (Laughter.)  In  fact,  it  is 
bad  business.  The  argument  is  complete;  and  I congratulate 
you,  Mr.  Carnegie,  upon  the  success  which  has  attended  this  Con- 
gress, upon  the  impression  which  it  has  made,  not  only,  I think, 
in  America,  but  also  upon  the  world  at  large.  And  I think  we 
may  all  congratulate  you,  who  have  done  so  much  for  so  many 
years  in  this  cause,  that  this  Congress  has  proved  so  great  a 
success.  (Applause.) 

But,  when  we  are  satisfied  that  we  have  proved  war  to  be 
wrong,  how  much  further  have  we  got  ? What  about  the  future  ? 
We  may  look  back  on  the  past  and  be  able  to  say,  with  some 
confidence,  that  war  in  the  past  has  almost  always  been  unneces- 


373 

sary.  I will  venture  to  say  that  in  the  last  sixty  years  there  has 
been  only  one  war  which  could  have  been  called  necessary;  that 
is  to  say,  only  one  war  the  object  of  which  was  worth  fighting 
for,  and  which  object  could  not  have  been  obtained  by  peaceful 
means.  I am  not  going  to  tell  you  what  war  that  was.  (Great 
laughter  and  applause.)  Everybody  might  not  agree  with  the 
particular  war  which  I have  in  mind.  (Laughter.)  Therefore 
I will  leave  the  name  of  that  war  blank  and  everybody  can  fill  it 
up  according  to  his  own  pleasure. 

Let  us  think  a little  of  the  future.  What  are  we  going  to  do 
to  prevent  war  in  the  future?  Suppose  some  cynical  critic 
should  come  and  say  to  us : Ladies  and  gentlemen,  you  have 
had  a successful  Congress,  because  you  are  now  agreed.  You 
came  here  being  friends  of  Peace  and  believers  in  Peace.  You 
are,  according  to  the  French  saying,  “Preaching  to  the  con- 
verted,” but  you  ought  to  bring  in  the  unconverted;  you  ought 
to  preach  to  them;  you  ought  to  try  to  convince,  not  only  one 
another,  but  those  whom  the  Scripture  calls  “The  people  that 
delight  in  war.”  Are  we  doing  that?  Our  cynic  will  continue: 
What  result,  he  will  say,  do  you  expect  to  attain  by  your  resolu- 
tions? Are  you  not  rather  like  a congress  of  sheep,  with  irre- 
proachable white  fleeces  (laughter)  who  are  met  together  to 
pass  resolutions  entreating  the  wolves  to  leave  off  biting  ? 
(Laughter.)  You  must  get  after  the  wolves,  you  must  put  press- 
ure on  the  wolves,  you  must  remove  the  causes  which  in  the  past 
have  made  for  war.  Now,  that  ought  to  lead  us  to  ask,  how  it 
is  that  war  has  come  about?  I think  that  the  phenomena  are 
fairly  familiar  to  many  of  us.  A difference  arises  between  two 
nations.  Each  nation  knows  and  sees  and  thinks  only  of  its 
own  side.  It  doesn’t  know — it  doesn’t  often  care  to  know — 
the  side  of  the  other  nation.  They  state  the  case  of  their  own 
nation  very  fully  and  they  neglect  altogether  to  state  the  case 
of  the  other  nation.  They  exaggerate  altogether  the  object  of 
dispute,  and  they  tell  the  nation  that  its  honor  is  involved  in 
fighting  for  it.  They  collect  every  spiteful,  angry  or  malicious 
word  that  is  spoken  in  the  newspapers  of  the  other  nation  and 
publish  it  to  the  nation  in  which  they  are,  and  they  omit  every- 
thing that  can  soften  feeling  and  mitigate  hostility.  In  that  way 
they  lash  the  people  into  a fury.  The  governments  get  fright- 
ened; the  governments  drift  with  the  tides  and  war  is  declared. 


374 

We  all  know  that  in  times  past  wars  have  come  about  in  this 
way.  And  one  of  the  saddest  outcomes  of  it  is  that  not  only  do 
the  wolves  rush  in  and  become  masters  of  the  field,  but  that  many 
of  those  innocent  sheep,  who  were  meeting  in  congresses  and 
passing  resolutions  in  favor  of  Peace,  turn  into  wolves  them- 
selves. (Laughter  and  applause.) 

I am  afraid  that  at  the  bottom  of  the  most  of  us  there  is  a 
little  touch  of  the  wolfish  element ; and  when  a nation  gets  excited, 
when  people  lose  their  heads  under  the  stimulus  of  passion,  the 
wolf  comes  to  the  top.  Now,  whose  fault  is  it  that  these  things 
happen  ? Is  it  the  fault  of  the  governments  ? I don’t  deny  that  gov- 
ernments, which  ought  to  know  and  generally  do  know,  more 
about  the  merits  of  the  case  than  the  people  know,  are  sometimes 
weak  and  fail  to  assert  their  own  views  with  sufficient  firmness, 
but  they  say  that  the  nation  wants  them  to  go  to  war.  Is  it  the 
fault  of  the  newspapers?  We  all  know  that  the  newspapers  do 
often  fan  the  flame  and  spread  the  flame, — but  why  do  they  do 
it?  Because  the  newspapers  believe  that  they  are  pleasing  the 
people.  The  newspapers  want  to  please  the  people;  they  don’t 
want  to  displease  the  people ; they  want  to  give  the  people  what 
they  think  the  people  want  to  have.  Ladies  and  gentlemen,  it 
isn’t  for  us  to  blame  the  newspapers.  The  press  of  every  country 
is  what  the  country  makes  it.  (Applause.)  Every  nation  has 
exactly  the  sort  of  newspaper  it  deserves.  (Applause.)  I am 
afraid  that  in  the  last  resort  the  cause  of  the  breaking  out  of 
war  rests  with  the  people.  It  is  because  the  people  forget  those 
excellent  maxims  which  they  had  supposedly  believed  in  and 
adhered  to  in  quiet  times ; because  they  are  carried  away  by  the 
passion,  which  works  like  a fever  in  the  air  and  carries  them  into 
that  course  which  they  were  previously  resolved  to  avoid.  Now, 
if  that  is  so,  and  I am  afraid  the  recollections  of  many  of  us 
can  confirm  it,  if  that  is  so,  what  can  we  do  to  prevent  in  the 
future  what  we  have  so  often  seen  in  the  past?  How  shall  we 
prevent  nations  from  losing  their  heads?  There  are,  I think, 
three  expedients,  three  possible  expedients  that  may  be  sug- 
gested. 

The  first  is  that  every  nation  should  endeavor  to  reduce  the 
pride  it  feels  in  its  large  military  and  naval  forces,  because  the 
possession  of  those  large  naval  and  military  forces  necessarily 
leads  it  to  desire  to  use  the  armament  for  which  it  has  been 


375 

taxing  itself  so  heavily.  Now,  I do  not  deny  that  the  question  of 
the  limitation  of  armament  is  an  extremely  difficult  question. 
Everyone  knows  the  obstacles  there  are  to  a simultaneous  reduc- 
tion of  armament  by  the  great  powers.  The  object  is  one  of  such 
extreme  importance  that  it  ought  to  be  seriously  studied,  kept 
before  the  minds  of  all  the  great  nations,  presented  to  them  on 
every  occasion  when  they  gather  together,  so  that,  if  possible, 
some  attempt  may  be  made  to  solve  this  difficult  and  yet 
immensely  important  problem.  It  doesn’t  get  any  easier  by  wait- 
ing. The  difficulties  do  not  diminish  while  you  wait,  and  the 
armaments  go  on  increasing.  I do  believe  that  it  will  be  the  duty 
of  the  Hague  Conference  to  address  itself  in  an  earnest  spirit 
to  this  question,  and  even  if  it  is  not  possible  now  to  bring  about 
that  system  which  we  all  desire,  at  any  rate  let  the  question  be 
seriously  studied  and  let  an  effort  be  made  to  advance  one  stage 
toward  its  solution.  (Applause.) 

The  second  measure  we  may  take  is  that  of  endeavoring  to 
frame  general  treaties  of  arbitration,  treaties  with  a wider  scope 
than  arbitration  treaties  have  generally  had  in  the  past.  Treaties 
which  will  embrace  every  case  where  a disinterested  third  party 
could  enable  two  nations  to  adjust  their  differences.  It  is  not 
always  possible  to  have  a judicial  decision,  but  much  is  gained 
in  getting  a dispassionate  third  party,  such  as  the  Court  of  the 
Hague  Tribunal,  to  suggest  some  course  that  will  enable  them 
to  find  a common  solution.  There  are  many  cases  in  which  a 
nation  is  told  that  its  honor  is  involved,  and  its  own  honor  is  dear 
to  a nation.  But  if  there  is  a Court  of  Arbitration  which  can 
tell  the  nation  that  its  honor  will  not  suffer  by  making  a con- 
cession, it  becomes  easier  for  the  nation  to  make  the  concession 
and  the  danger  of  a conflict  is  averted.  (Applause.) 

Let  us  earnestly  hope  that  this  sitting  of  the  Hague  Tribunal 
may  devote  itself  to  the  question  of  constituting  a permanent 
body,  which  cannot  be  too  authoritative,  and  of  investing  that 
body  with  the  widest  powers  that  the  arbitration  treaties  can  give 
it  as  arbitrator  or  as  mediator  in  the  largest  possible  number  of 
cases  of  difference.  (Applause.) 

Lastly,  although  it  is  quite  true  that  a Congress  like  this 
cannot  hope  to  avert  the  advent  of  those  crises,  which  in  times 
past  have  frequently  ended  in  war,  still  it  surely  can  do  a great 
deal  in  endeavoring  to  diffuse  among  the  masses  of  the  people 


376 

a sense  of  responsibility,  which  we  all  have,  which  every  citizen 
has,  which  is  the  greatest  of  all  in  countries,  like  your  country 
and  my  country,  where  the  power  rests  in  the  hands  of  the  indi- 
vidual voter,  to  bring  home  to  him  his  responsibility  in  putting 
an  end  to  the  oldest  of  all  the  evils  that  afflict  humanity.  The 
older  an  evil  is,  the  more  ingrained  it  is  in  human  nature,  the 
more  difficult  it  is  to  root  it  out.  We  must  be  content  if  we  can 
make  some  progress.  I believe  we  have  made  some  progress 
and  are  making  more.  It  is  something,  that  so  long  a period 
should  have  elapsed  without  any  great  European  war ; and  I 
think  we  all  may  agree  that  whether  or  not  the  spirit  of  Chris- 
tianity is  any  stronger  than  it  has  been,  this  at  least  is  true, 
that  the  spirit  of  Christianity  was  never  so  much  directed  as  it 
is  to-day  toward  removing  the  actual  evils  which  afflict  the  world. 
(Applause.)  Congresses  like  this  may  surely  do  much  to 
strengthen  that  beneficent  influence,  and  may  do  much  to  summon 
the  nations  of  the  earth  to  listen  to  the  voice  that  pleads  for 
Peace.  (Applause.) 

Mr.  Carnegie: 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : I am  requested  to  announce  that 
our  two  ambassadors,  Sir  Robert  Cranston,  Lord  Provost  of 
Edinburgh,  and  his  companion,  Ambassador  Creel,  are  just  taking 
their  departure  to  enlighten  the  corresponding  banquet  at  the 
Waldorf ; we  expect  to  receive  two  ambassadors  back  from  them 
in  the  course  of  a few  minutes. 

Ladies  and  gentlemen,  there  usually  exists  in  every  country, 
perhaps  not  all  at  the  same  time,  but  every  country  has  had  one 
or  more,  such  characters  as  I am  to  describe.  Britain  had  hers 
in  Mr.  Gladstone,  who  won  and  justly  bore  the  character  of  “The 
Grand  Old  Man.”  (Applause.)  We  have  one  in  this  Republic, 
known  from  the  Atlantic  to  the  Pacific,  and  from  the  borders  of 
Canada  to  the  borders  of  Mexico. 

There  is  only  one,  and  there  never  can  be  more  than  one 
at  one  time,  and  I have  the  pleasure  to-night  of  presenting  to  you 
“The  Grand  Old  Man”  of  our  Republic.  (Great  applause.) 

Rev.  Edward  Everett  Hale: 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : *The  old  man  has  lived  long 
enough  to  know  how  to  hold  his  tongue  upon  occasions.  (Ap- 


377 

plause.)  So  I do  not  propose  at  present  to  say  one  word  about 
Peace.  I am  going  to  say  one  word  about  Justice.  (Applause.) 
Give  us  Justice  and  Peace  will  follow.  (Applause.)  When  you 
meet  in  a train  as  you  are  going  home  a lady  who  tells  you 
that  her  great-grandfather  fought  at  Bunker  Hill,  thank  her  for 
her  great-grandfather  and  thank  her  that  he  fought  there  (ap- 
plause), but  tell  her  that  you  have  not  been  here  to  talk  Peace, 
but  to  talk  Justice.  (Applause.)  In  the  year  1789  the  first 
Peace  Society  in  the  world  was  formed.  The  name  of  it  was, 
and  still  is,  the  United  States  of  America.  (Applause  and  cries 
of  “Good!”)  The  United  States  of  America  has  the  honor  of 
showing  to  the  world  that  thirteen  nations  can  live  together  in 
Peace.  The  way  the  United  States  of  America  taught  that  was 
by  establishing  a Supreme  Court,  a common  tribunal,  to  decide 
all  questions  which  existed  between  the  States.  A task  like  that 
is  before  us  now.  They  had  to  reconcile  thirteen  different 
colonies,  sovereign  and  independent,  of  different  religions,  of 
different  languages  and  of  different  origin.  But  the  United  States 
of  America  did  that  thing.  I am  speaking  to  people  from  Mis- 
souri and  from  Iowa  who  do  not  know  that  a generation  ago 
the  armies  of  these  two  States  were  ready  to  fight  against  each 
other.  Why  didn’t  they  fight  each  other?  Because  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  decided  the  question  between  them. 
They  never  sent  a Sheriff  there;  they  never  sent  a Marshal 
there,  but  the  great  nations  of  Missouri  and  Iowa  are  at  Peace 
and  they  have  been  at  Peace,  because  there  was  a supreme  tri- 
bunal. It  was  two  years  before  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  had  a question  come  before  it  between  man  and  man, 
or  between  State  and  State.  Once  in  a quarter  the  Supreme 
Court  met,  made  a memorandum  that  it  had  met,  appointed  a 
few  court  officers  and  adjourned.  Its  work  was  in  the  circuit  of 
the  different  States. 

Now  our  friends  say  to  us,  what  has  the  Hague  Tribunal 
done?  The  gentlemen  of  the  press  compliment  us  who  are  here. 
They  call  us  rabid.  “What,”  they  say,  “have  the  rabid  done?” 
Well,  the  supreme  tribunal  established  there  has  only  settled 
five  or  six  questions  of  difference.  Isn’t  that  worth  talk- 
ing about?  Isn’t  that  worth  comparing  with  a good  baseball 
column?  Isn’t  that  worth  comparing  with  an  accident  on  the 
railroad  in  which  three  hundred  people  are  killed?  “Oh,  we 


378 

can’t  waste  any  time  on  the  Hague  Tribunal.  It  is  on  the  shelf ; 
what  next?”  (Laughter.) 

I was  talking  within  a month  with  a gentleman  of  the  high- 
est authority  in  recent  history,  and  he  said  to  me:  “The  Republic 
doesn’t  care,  and  the  Republic  doesn’t  know ; but  when  the 
trawling  incident  took  place  and  when  some  Russian  vessels 
fired  upon  some  English  fishermen,  there  was  no  war.”  Why 
was  there  no  war?  Because  that  forgotten  Hague  Tribunal  had 
laid  down  the  relations  which  existed  between  the  governments. 
Because  that  forgotten  tribunal  had  made  the  arrangements  by 
which  the  courts  of  England  and  Russia  could  provide  for  an 
examination  into  that  question.  Because  the  Russian  fleet  was 
stopped  at  Gibraltar  until  that  investigation  could  be  continued. 
Because  of  that,  this  man  of  authority,  this  man  who  knew  what 
he  was  talking  about,  said  to  me  there  was  no  war  between 
Russia  and  England.  Really,  as  we  go  home  to-night,  as  we 
meet  these  people  in  the  cars  who  say  we  are  “rabid,”  I think 
we  might  suggest  to  them  that  it  is  something,  that  we  have 
brought  about  justice  in  half  a dozen  cases  where  justice  would 
not  have  been  known.  (Applause.) 

Believe  me,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  it  is  the  last  word  I will 
say  to  you.  Peace  follows  Justice.  (Applause.)  Peace  follows 
Justice,  and  that  is  what  we  are  here  for.  (Great  applause.) 


Professor  George  W.  Kirch wey  : 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : The  Baron 
d’Estournelles  de  Constant,  after  making  a most  important  and 
interesting  announcement  at  the  parallel  dinner  going  on  at  the 
Waldorf-Astoria,  has  presented  himself  here,  with  a message 
from  the  French  Republic,  which  he  will  now,  with  your  per- 
mission, deliver. 

Baron  d’Estournelles  de  Constant  : 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  You  will  excuse  me  for  arriving 
late,  but  I find  a difficulty  in  not  being  accustomed  yet  to  having 
two  dinners  the  same  evening  (laughter),  and  still  less  to  making 
two  speeches  after  these  two  dinners.  But  I am  very  happy  and 
very  proud  of  having  this  opportunity  to  speak  on  the  last 


379 

evening  of  the  Congress.  I can  tell  you  that  I shall  go  back  to 
my  country  full  of  faith,  full  of  certainty  for  the  future.  After 
I arrived  here  to-night  I witnessed  the  sight  of  a most  respected 
and  great  old  man  speaking  like  a young  man.  (Applause.) 
Knowing  him  as  we  all  do,  but  also  from  what  my  friend,  Mr. 
Carnegie  has  said,  I think  you  will  allow  me  to  say,  as  a foreigner 
who  came  here  yesterday  and  who  will  be  gone  to-morrow,  that  it 
was  a fine  sight  to  see  in  your  great  country  an  old  man  speaking 
like  a young  man,  speaking  of  the  future.  I thought  yesterday 
I had  seen  all  that  I could  enjoy  when  I had  seen  your  American 
children  full  of  confidence  of  Peace,  but  I see  now  better  still ; 
I see  there  is  no  difference  here  between  generations ; I see  that 
the  old  people  are  not  against  the  young  people ; I see  that  you  all 
agree  in  aiming  at  this  admirable  idea,  the  substitution  of  arbi- 
tration and  justice  for  the  horrors  of  war.  (Great  applause, 
during  the  course  of  which  Dr.  Hale  bowed  to  Baron  d’Estour- 
nelles.) 

I trust  you  will  excuse  me,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  for  speak- 
ing thus,  but  we  are  amongst  friends  and  we  may  say  what  we 
feel.  (Applause  and  cries  of  “Hear!  Hear!”)  And  chiefly 
when  what  we  feel  now  is  so  good  and  so  encouraging,  and  for 
a European,  for  a Frenchman,  so  necessary. 

When  I return  to  Europe  I shall  find  skeptics  laughing  as 
they  always  do  when  one  speaks  of  a new  idea,  but  I shall  not 
mind;  I shall  tell  them:  “You  may  laugh,  you  old  people 
(laughter),  but  you  do  not  live  in  America.  They  act  their 
belief  and  you  will  be  obliged  to  follow  them.”  (Great  ap- 
plause.) 

It  is  not  a mere  phrase,  it  is  a fact.  They  will  follow  you. 
It  is  not  the  first  time.  They  know  the  way  now.  (Laughter.) 
Five  or  six  years  ago,  I know  it  well  and  many  of  my  friends 
can  tell  you,  five  or  six  years  ago  you  could  not  have  given  such 
a double  dinner.  We  could  not  have  spoken  of  our  faith  and  of 
our  certainty  as  we  do  to-night,  because  very  few  people  would 
believe  in  the  future  of  arbitration.  We  were  all  laughing  at 
the  Hague  Court.  We  said  it  was  an  ideal,  a dream,  and  in 
fact  that  dream  had  no  existence.  No  one  would  present  a case 
for  the  new  court  to  judge.  It  was  America  who  gave  the  first 
case  to  the  Hague  Court.  That  is  to  say,  it  was  America  which 


3^0 

gave  existence  to  the  Hague  Court.  (Applause.)  But  that  was 
not  enough,  and  that  is  what  I want  to  speak  about  to-night.  I 
know  the  matter  very  well,  because  I belonged  to  the  first  Hague 
Conference.  I was  there  with  my  American  colleagues  and  we 
have  not  forgotten.  The  poor  Hague  Court  was  existing  on 
paper,  but  had  no  ground,  no  house  or  home.  Then  a man  came 
and  you  may  well  be  proud  that  that  man  was  an  American,  too. 
He  said,  “It  is  really  too  bad  to  see  such  a great  institution  with 
such  a great  future  without  a home.  Perhaps  if  I give  it  a 
home  it  will  receive  more  consideration  from  the  governments.” 
So  Mr.  Andrew  Carnegie  came  and  upon  his  own  initiative  gave 
that  home,  that  palace,  the  first  institution  for  international  arbi- 
tration. (Great  applause.)  He  gave  it,  and  it  was  a very  impor- 
tant act.  Yet  it  was  very  little  compared  to  the  great  example,  I 
do  not  say  to  the  lesson,  to  the  great  example  he  gave,  an  example 
which  has  been  striking  enough  to  decide  the  governments  to 
follow  the  American  way.  (Applause.) 

And  now  the  Court  of  The  Hague  exists,  and  we  can  be 
pretty  sure  that  in  a few  years  we  will  see  the  Hague  Court  estab- 
lished as  your  great  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  is,  and 
that  Court,  which  has  been  for  three  or  four  years  quite  empty, 
will  be  so  full  of  cases  that  it  will  almost  require  two  courts 
instead  of  one.  This  is  due  to  your  initiative  (the  speaker  turn- 
ing to  Mr.  Carnegie),  and  this  has  been  the  example  given  to  the 
governments  of  the  world.  The  governments  are  not  ungrateful. 
They  understand  now  what  has  been  done,  and  in  France  espe- 
cially they  appreciate  it.  They  have  not  forgotten  the  principles 
of  the  French  Revolution.  Our  great  Revolution  considered 
that  it  is  not  enough  for  a man  to  be  a good  citizen  of  his  own 
country,  he  must  try  to  be  a good  citizen  of  all  the  world.  (Great 
applause  and  cries  of  “Hear!  Hear!”)  And  because  we  found 
in  France  that  the  act  of  Mr.  Andrew  Carnegie  was  a faithful 
application  of  our  most  beloved  and  respected  principle,  the 
government  of  France,  the  Republic,  wanted  to  send  a public 
testimonial  of  its  esteem  and  gratitude  to  the  man  who  has  fur- 
nished such  a good  example  and  built  the  Palace  of  Peace. 
(Great  applause.) 

Mr.  Carnegie,  let  me  say,  my  dear  friend  (turning  to  Mr. 
Carnegie),  that  I am  very  happy  to  be  the  bearer  of  the  good 
news.  You  are  now  to  be  in  the  rank  of  a Commander  of  the 


38 1 

Legion  of  Honor.  Let  me,  my  dear  friend,  attach  to  you  this 
ribbon  (the  Baron  here  placed  the  order  about  the  neck  of  Mr. 
Carnegie),  let  me  consider  now  that  you  are  an  American,  as  well 
as  an  Englishman,  an  Englishman  as  well  as  a Frenchman,  a 
citizen  of  the  world.  You  have  done  a great  work  and  we  thank 
you.  (At  this  point  there  was  great  applause,  the  audience  rising 
en  masse.) 


Mr.  Carnegie  : 

My  Friends  ; Baron  d’Estournelles  de  Constant  : This 
honor  is  as  surprising  as  it  is  overwhelming.  None  knows  better 
than  I that  it  is  not  deserved.  No,  it  is  not  deserved  for  any- 
thing that  I have  done ; but  if  a heart  that  keeps  on  enlarging 
as  I grow  older  (applause  and  cries  of  “Bravo !”),  embracing 
more  and  more  of  the  world  and  the  people  of  the  world,  if  that 
merits  the  cross  of  the  Legion  of  Honor,  I believe  that  I do 
deserve  it.  For  I do  find  with  every  successive  year  of  my  life 
that  I take  higher  and  higher  views,  that  I think  more  and  more 
of  humanity,  that  I have  brighter  and  brighter  visions  of  its 
future.  (Great  applause.) 

That  this  honor  comes  from  France  makes  it  doubly  accept- 
able. (Applause.)  I remember  what  France  was  to  this 
Republic  when  she  needed  a friend.  (Applause.)  I remember 
what  the  French  people  are  capable  of  sacrificing  for  an  ideal. 
(Applause.)  I know  what  France  has  done  for  the  world  of  art. 
And  I know  what  the  Legion  of  Honor  means.  It  embraces 
the  men  of  distinction  in  every  field  of  human  endeavor.  The 
great  man  of  France  to-day  has  been  selected  by  a vote  of 
several  millions  of  her  people  recently.  The  soldier?  No. 
Napoleon  himself  was  seventh  on  the  list.  Pasteur,  the  hero  of 
civilization,  as  Napoleon  is  the  hero  of  barbarism,  was  first, 
followed  by  two  scientists  and  then  by  two  authors  ; and  Napoleon, 
who  was  like  some  huge  Colossus,  is  seventh  already  in  the  esti- 
mation of  that  intelligent  people,  the  French,  and  with  every 
successive  vote  destined  to  fall  lower  and  lower  in  the  list  until 
his  name  be  remembered  no  more  except  as  a monster  who 
killed  his  fellowman  for  his  own  glory.  I love  France  for  her 
idealism ; I love  her  because  she  was  the  friend  of  this,  my 
country;  I love  her  because  she  was  a friend  of  my  native  land, 


382 

for  Scotland  and  France  were  ever  good  friends.  (Applause.) 
None  knows  so  well  as  I that  I do  not  deserve  this  honor,  but  it 
is  so  great  an  honor  it  doesn’t  exalt ; it  humbles,  when  I compare 
it  with  the  small  service  that  I have  rendered.  But  it  does  this 
also:  it  furnishes  another  bond  binding  me  still  more  strictly 
so  to  live  my  life  that  France,  who  bestowed  it  upon  me,  shall 
never  have  cause  to  regret  that  she  was  generous  enough  to 
embrace  me  in  that  circle  of  men  who  have  won  her  august 
approval.  (Great  applause.) 

I will  now  call  upon  a man  who  has  risen  to  the  highest 
position  he  can  attain  in  his  department  of  work,  a man  who 
has  been  trusted  by  his  fellow  men,  who  enjoys  the  confidence 
of  the  workingmen  of  the  Republic  and  who  has  earned  the 
respect  and  the  confidence  of  the  employers,  with  whom  he  comes 
in  contact  as  an  equal;  a name  highly  respected,  one  you  will 
be  glad  to  hear;  one  whose  voice  in  the  cause  of  Peace  is  a 
potential  voice,  because  he  reaches  the  great  masses  upon  whom, 
in  a republican  country,  we  must  depend  for  success  in  any 
cause  we  embrace.  I have  great  pleasure  in  introducing  to  you 
Samuel  Gompers,  Esq.,  President  of  the  American  Federation  of 
Labor.  (Applause.) 

Mr.  Gompers  : 

Mr.  Toastmaster,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : It  is  quite  in 
keeping  with  the  great  cause  of  labor,  which  I have  the  honor  to 
represent  here,  for  me  to  have  accepted  the  invitation  to  address 
this  magnificent  assemblage  upon  the  subject  now  so  conspicu- 
ously occupying  the  minds  of  the  earnest,  thinking,  humane  men 
of  our  time — the  horrors  of  war,  and  the  movement  to  substitute 
for  them  the  more  humane  methods,  for  the  establishment  and 
maintenance  of  Peace  among  the  nations  of  the  world.  For 
quite  apart  from  the  altruistic  and  humane  sentiments  which  the 
working  men  share  with  others  in  the  effort  to  abolish  the  arbitra- 
ment of  international  disputes  by  resort  to  war,  the  workmen 
recognize  that  though  others  may  fall,  the  brunt  of  war  is  borne 
by  them,  not  only  upon  the  battlefield  itself,  but  in  bearing  the 
burdens  which  follow  war. 

Of  all  the  people  who  suffer  from  war,  the  toilers  are  most 
intensely  interested.  They  are  the  great  burden-bearers  of  its 


383 

resultant  horrors  and  sufferings.  It  is,  therefore,  not  difficult 
to  discern  why  they  have  from  their  first  gatherings,  and  at 
almost  every  gathering  thereafter,  committed  themselves  unal- 
terably and  vitally  to  the  abolition  of  war,  through  a duly  consti- 
tuted international  court  of  arbitration  for  the  adjudication  of  all 
international  contentions  which  cannot  be  settled  through  the 
ordinary  channels  of  conciliation  and  diplomacy. 

It  is  a source  of  satisfaction  and  pride  to  recall  the  fact  that 
the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  in  its  convention  in  1887  at 
Baltimore,  heartily  welcomed  that  pioneer  of  international  arbitra- 
tion, William  Randal  Cremer,  the  union  stonecutter,  member  of 
Parliament  of  England,  and  unanimously  declared  in  favor  of 
an  arbitration  treaty  between  that  country  and  the  United  States, 
a course  which  labor  has,  through  our  organized  movement  since 
that  time,  consistently  and  persistently  pressed  home  upon  the 
conscience  of  our  people. 

In  a gathering  of  this  character  it  is  not  necessary  to  dwell 
in  detail,  or  in  figures,  upon  the  almost  fabulous  sums  of  money 
entailed  in  the  cost  of  wars,  the  cost  of  standing  armies  and 
navies,  not  even  their  cost  when  maintained  upon  what  is 
ludicrously  termed  a “Peace  footing.”  These  figures  can  be 
obtained  by  any  one  who  cares  to  know.  It  is  sufficient  for  us 
to  know  the  immense  increase  within  the  past  ten  years  in  the  cost 
of  our  own  army,  navy  and  armaments.  It  suffices  us  to  know 
that  it  saps  the  very  life-blood  of  industry  and  the  standards  of 
life  of  the  people  of  other  countries.  If  the  barracks,  armories 
and  navy  yards  were  transformed  into  school  houses,  colleges, 
universities,  university  extensions,  manual  training  schools, 
schools  of  technology,  libraries,  museums  of  natural  history,  to  air 
space,  to  breathing  places,  to  improved  homes,  factories,  and 
workshops,  it  would  be  found  that  the  ravages  of  the  white  plague 
and  its  kindred  ills  which  decimate  so  large  a number  of  the 
human  family,  would  be  greatly  decreased ; if  the  thought  of  man 
were  devoted  to  spreading  the  knowledge  of  the  arts  and  sciences ; 
to  instilling  into  the  minds  of  the  masses  the  love  of  the  good,  the 
beautiful,  the  useful ; to  teaching  man  to  emulate  and  vie  with 
the  best;  to  render  to  his  fellows,  and  hence  to  himself  and  his, 
the  greatest  public  service ; it  would  make  for  the  social  uplift  of 
all  mankind. 


3§4 

War  is  the  practice  of  the  most  consummate  skill  in  the  art 
of  destruction — destruction  of  human  life  and  human  product. 
Peace  affords  the  opportunity  to  develop  the  best  that  is  in  man, 
both  productive  and  constructive.  It  is  the  noblest  attribute  of 
man’s  duty  to  man,  the  world  over. 

It  is  a travesty  upon  intelligence  to  assert  that  men  trained 
in  the  art  of,  and  organized  for,  war  and  destruction,  make  for 
Peace.  Incidentally  in  every  occupation  or  profession,  an  indi- 
vidual may  see  the  wrong  in  it  and  protest  against  the  tendency ; 
but  the  men  who  have  given  either  their  whole  lives  or  many 
years  thereof  to  the  study  of  the  art  of  war  must  be  expected  to 
hope  and  work  and  bend  every  effort  for  the  creation  of  an 
opportunity  by  which  they  can  bring  their  art  and  profession  into 
practice.  It  is  as  unthinkable  for  financiers  to  exist  long  with- 
out money,  doctors  without  patients,  lawyers  without  clients, 
wage-earners  without  work,  as  soldiers  without  war. 

If  we  hope  to  reach  the  time  when  wars  among  nations  shall 
be  no  longer,  efforts  toward  its  attainment  must  be  made,  not 
by  those  trained  in  the  profession  of  the  soldier  nor  by  those 
who  bind  their  faith  in  his  influence  for  Peace,  but  by  the  men 
who  love  Peace  for  the  sake  of  Peace  and  for  the  sake  of 
humanity. 

The  working  men  of  all  countries  often  note  with  impatience 
the  platonic  declarations  for  the  maintenance  of  international 
Peace,  and  for  the  spread  of  civilizing  influences  throughout  the 
world,  because  they  recognize  that  there  is  little  foundation  in 
them  upon  which  to  pin  their  faith. 

Labor  welcomes,  without  being  carpingly  critical,  any  effort 
which  may  be  made  to  bring  Peace  to  all  the  peoples  of  the  world. 
Labor  sincerely  declares  that  the  time  must  come,  and  come  soon, 
when  the  world  will  recognize  that  Peace  is  as  essential  to  the  full 
development  of  industry,  to  commercial  and  civilized  life,  as  is 
air  to  human  life. 

Organized  labor  recognizes  that  primarily  the  interests  of 
the  workers  and  generally  of  all  the  peoples  of  the  world,  are 
identical,  and  it  constantly  cultivates  the  spirit  and  bond  of 
brotherhood. 

Labor  realizes  the  fact  that  industry  and  commercial  com- 
petition constantly  becomes  keener  the  world  over ; that  standing 
armies  are  often  used  for  the  purpose  of  opening  up  new  markets 


385 

for  so-called  “surplus  products” ; that  these  entail  the  dangers  of 
fratricidal  wars  between  international  competitors,  and  that,  there- 
fore, upon  the  shoulders  of  the  intelligent,  working  wealth-pro- 
ducers, the  wage-earners  of  all  countries,  devolves  the  larger 
responsibility  for  the  preservation  of  Peace;  that  the  voice  of 
labor  must  become  more  potent  in  the  formation  of  a great  inter- 
national public  opinion,  such  a public  opinion  as  before  whose 
supreme  tribunal  both  monarch  and  merchant  must  inevitably 
bow,  and  that  wars  of  aggrandizement  and  greed  must  be  rele- 
gated to  the  oblivion  of  the  barbaric  ages. 

The  expedient  so  often  resorted  to  by  rulers  of  foreign 
nations  to  stifle  internal  discontent  is  now  no  longer  tenable.  The 
people  have  tasted  freedom ; their  lives  are  intensely  interwoven 
in  the  world  movement  for  its  attainment;  their  souls  yearn  for 
its  fullest  fruition ; their  hopes  cannot  longer  be  diverted,  nor  their 
aspirations  thwarted. 

Among  the  masses  there  is  an  eternal  verity  in  their  aspira- 
tions for  liberty;  their  historic  struggles  to  emerge  from  slavery 
and  serfdom  into  free  men,  and  neither  tyranny  nor  greed  can 
long  continue  to  overcome  them.  The  bondman  and  the  vassal 
of  the  past,  typified  by  the  man  with  the  hoe,  stand  to-day  upright, 
intelligent,  with  head  erect,  stout-hearted  and  determined  to  take 
their  places  among  the  men  of  the  nations  of  the  earth,  no  longer 
to  be  armed  by  a master  or  goaded  on  to  venture  their  own  lives 
in  the  effort  to  destroy  the  life  of  their  brother  man. 

In  all  civilized  countries  there  is  an  earnest  effort  afoot 
among  people  for  national  development  to  solve  along  evolu- 
tionary lines  the  material,  political,  moral  and  social  problems 
confronting  them.  These  must  no  longer  be  retarded  or  inter- 
rupted by  brutal  wars. 

I come  to  you  with  the  credential  of  the  latest  declaration  of 
the  organized  labor  movement  of  America,  which,  in  the  conven- 
tion of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  a few  weeks  ago 
averred:  “We  reaffirm  the  doctrine  of  international  brotherhood 
and  urge  the  trade  unionists  of  America  to  join  in  promoting  all 
movements  having  for  their  purpose  the  elimination  of  the  cruel 
barbarism  of  war.” 

With  that  declaration  clearly  ringing  forth  the  hopes,  the 
aspirations,  and  the  determined  purpose  of  America’s  workers, 
I join  with  you  and  all  others  pledged  to  the  high  resolve  that 


25 


386 

war  among  the  nations  of  the  world  shall  once  and  for  all  be 
shunned  from  the  face  of  the  earth  and  give  way  to  the  higher, 
nobler,  and  more  humane  purpose  of  Peace  and  humanity.  I 
come  to  you  with  that  clarion  call  of  labor,  expressive  of  the  hope 
that  through  the  International  Court,  now  established,  resolve 
may  be  crystallized  into  eternal  Peace.  But,  lest  these  hopes  be 
dissipated,  it  may  not  be  amiss  for  all  to  bear  in  mind  that  in 
the  last  analysis  the  masses  of  the  people  of  every  country  have 
it  in  their  hands  to  exert  their  own  giant  power  to  compel  Peace, 
and  that  if  otherwise  thwarted,  they  will  not  hesitate  to 
exert  it.  (Applause.) 

Mr.  Carnegie: 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : You  know  the  time  when  the 
best  wine  was  reserved  for  the  last.  Well,  I am  not  going  to 
specify  quite  so  clearly  as  that,  but  certainly  there  is  in  every 
country  some  man  distinguished  for  his  virtue.  In  times  of 
trouble  and  doubt,  when  the  country  hesitates,  does  not  see 
clearly  which  way  it  ought  to  go,  what  is  its  duty,  we  have  a 
man  whose  clarion  voice  rings  out  so  clearly,  so  truly,  you  never 
have  to  pause  for  a moment  to  know  just  what  he  stands  for 
and  what  he  means;  and  he  always  means  and  he  always  stands 
for  that  which  he  sees  to  be  right.  We  have  such  a man  here 
to-night.  The  difference  between  British  Universities,  as  far 
as  I know,  and  our  own  universities  is  nothing  more  than  this : 
that  we  have  men  at  the  head  of  our  universities  who  speak  to 
the  nation  from  the  high  standpoint  of  disinterestedness  and  tell 
the  nation,  from  their  superior  education  and  wider  outlook, 
what  the  nation  should  do,  what  path  it  should  tread — the  path 
of  righteousness.  I call  upon  one,  the  foremost  voice  of  that  kind 
in  this  country — President  Eliot,  of  Harvard.  (Applause.) 

President  Eliot: 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : At  this  late  hour  I feel  the  urgent 
need  of  being  brief ; but  I want  to  follow  for  a few  moments  in 
the  steps  of  my  dear  friend,  the  British  Ambassador,  and  to  ask 
at  this  final  period  of  this  great  Congress,  what  action  we  are 
prepared  to  recommend?  I have  heard,  even  very  lately,  many 
doubtful  expressions  as  to  the  possibility  of  bringing  a meeting 
like  this  to  a conclusion  which  the  statesmen  of  the  world  will  call 


3^7 

profitable.  Now,  I do  not  want  to  deal  with  any  vision  or  hopes 
merely.  I want  to  deal  only  with  established  facts,  with  things 
done  and  reasonable  inferences  from  things  done,  and  with  things 
which  can  be  done  before  long.  I want  to  point  out  what  the 
past  has  realized  which  is  of  promise  for  the  near  future. 

Our  friend,  Mr.  Bryce,  spoke  of  the  common  origins  of  wars, 
and  described  them  justly  in  their  most  familiar  forms.  He 
seemed  to  me,  however,  not  to  make  quite  adequate  mention  of 
a very  common  cause  or  antecedent  condition  of  war,  namely, 
the  dense  ignorance  of  one  people  concerning  the  disposition, 
purposes,  and  qualities  of  another  people  (applause),  and  the 
distrust  which  results  from  this  ignorance.  Now,  in  this  respect 
the  world  has  made  great  gains  during  the  past  fifty  years ; we 
have  recorded  great  gains  in  regard  to  mutual  intercourse  and 
mutual  comprehension,  and  I believe  that  one  of  the  next  things 
we  ought  to  do  is  to  take  careful,  wise,  practical  steps  toward 
increasing  the  amount  of  international  publicity,  and  therefore 
the  mutual  acquaintance  and  mutual  intercourse  of  one  people 
with  another.  (Applause.)  Conceive,  ladies  and  gentlemen, 
what  new  powers  we  have  for  promoting  this  intercourse  and 
getting  acquainted.  Conceive  what  new  powers  applied  science 
has  furnished  the  world  with  in  steam  communication  and  elec- 
tric speech.  Conceive  how  these  new  powers  can  be  further 
utilized  to  this  good  end  of  mutual  knowledge  and  sympathy.  It 
would  be  better  if  the  civilized  nations  of  the  world  would  unite 
in  carrying  on  an  international  bureau  of  publicity,  just  as  a 
few  of  the  civilized  nations  united  to  keep  blazing  the  great  light- 
house on  Cape  Spartel,  when  the  government  in  whose  territory 
the  light  is  situated  would  not  undertake  the  duty  of  maintain- 
ing it.  If  we  could  extend  that  co-operative  mode  of  action,  so 
that  there  would  be  in  every  capital  of  the  world,  in  every  port 
where  the  exports  and  imports  of  two  or  more  nations  are  con- 
stantly exchanged,  in  every  great  frontier  city,  and  every  great 
center  of  distribution,  an  impartial,  intelligent,  expert  agent  for 
international  publicity,  reporting  steadily  and  with  dispatch  to 
one  central  publication  office,  an  effective  security  would  be  pro- 
vided for  International  Peace.  We  already  know  the  way  to 
organize  and  conduct  such  an  enterprise.  The  news  agencies  of 
the  commercial  world  have  shown  us  how;  the  press  of  the 
world,  the  dailies  and  weeklies  and  the  magazines  have  shown  us 


388 

how.  If  the  nations  will  not  thus  combine,  four  or  five  rich 
men,  public-spirited,  humane,  desiring  to  serve  their  countries 
and  the  world,  could  do  it  without  national  aid  of  any  sort.  I 
would  undertake  to  name — I need  not  name  them — four  or  five 
Americans  who  together  are  capable  of  doing  this  great  service 
to  the  whole  world.  (Applause.) 

We  have  rejoiced  in  everything  that  has  been  said  about  the 
institution  of  the  tribunal  of  The  Hague,  one  of  the  greatest 
triumphs  of  civilization  within  the  lives  of  those  here  present. 
But  the  good  work  is  not  yet  finished.  A court  ought  to  have 
a force  behind  it.  What  sort  of  a force  does  the  Hague  Tri- 
bunal need?  A police  force.  We  have  seen  one  example  of 
certain  civilized  nations  uniting  to  constitute  a police  force  and 
using  that  power — the  expedition  to  Pekin.  We  know  how  the 
idea  of  a police  force  and  the  exercise  of  police  powers  have 
developed  and  improved  during  the  last  fifty  years.  This  is  a 
form  of  force  which  human  society  will  long  need,  will  need  cen- 
tury after  century — the  protective  force.  It  is  the  force  that  keeps 
order,  that  keeps  the  peace,  that  brings  aid  in  disaster,  and  stands 
behind  every  court  of  justice  with  a power  sufficient  to  execute 
the  court’s  decrees.  Now,  that  is  the  international  force  which 
needs  to  be  provided ; and  again  we  know  the  way  to  do  it.  The 
nations  of  the  world  have  taught  the  way  within  their  own  boun- 
daries. An  international  police  would  be  only  an  extension  of 
the  idea  everywhere  familiar,  of  the  police  force  which  now  in  all 
civilized  communities  protects  the  great  majority  of  citizens 
against  the  disorders  of  a small  minority.  What  a delightful 
reflection  it  is  that  here  we  see  the  way  to  maintain  on  a large 
scale  that  kind  of  force  which  should  lie  behind  all  government, 
essentially  protective  in  its  nature,  and  rarely  used  for  any  other 
purpose.  I say  that  such  a force  will  be  needed  for  many  a 
century  to  come.  We  need  not  regret  it.  When  the  angels  sang 
above  the  plains  of  Bethlehem,  they  said,  “Peace  on  earth  to 
men  of  good-will.”  There  are  always  in  the  world  men  of  evil 
will,  and  force  will  be  needed  to  control  them.  It  is  the  mod- 
erate police  force  that  is  needed  for  that  control,  not  the  huge 
armies  and  navies.  (Applause.) 

Again,  the  world  has  learned  and  put  in  practice  the  doc- 
trine of  neutralization,  and  we  only  need  an  extension  of  that 
doctrine.  How  instructive  is  the  lesson  of  the  neutralization  of 


389 

Switzerland,  of  the  neutralization  of  the  Suez  Canal.  How 
simple  would  be  the  extension  of  neutralization  to  all  the  great 
routes  of  commerce,  provided  we  had  an  international  naval  police 
to  enforce  the  neutralization. 

I have  thus  far  spoken,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  as  if  I did  not 
recognize  that  human  passion  and  human  ill-will  have  had  much 
to  do  with  the  warfare  which  has  desolated  the  world.  It  is 
indeed  true,  however,  as  the  British  Ambassador  said,  that  passion 
and  misguided  sentiment  often  cause  war.  Now,  there  is  one 
sentiment  which  is  especially  apt  to  cause  war,  and  sometimes  the 
bitterest  kind  of  war.  I mean  the  sentiment  about  what  is  falsely 
called  “National  Honor.”  In  spite  of  the  immense  visible  prog- 
ress made  in  the  arbitration  of  disputes  between  nations — sixty 
cases  lately  in  three  years — we  hear,  now  on  this  side  of  the  world 
and  now  on  the  other,  that  there  are  questions  arising  between 
nations  which  cannot  be  arbitrated,  because  they  are  questions 
of  national  honor.  That  is  a fearful  misuse  of  the  term.  (Ap- 
plause and  cries  of  “Hear!  Hear!”)  The  honor  of  a nation 
is  said  to  be  violated  if  its  flag  is  ever  hauled  down  in  a land 
over  which  it  has  once  waved.  Now,  we  of  the  United  States 
have  lately  learned  and  taught  something  on  that  subject;  we 
hauled  down  our  flag  in  Cuba  (applause)  and  never,  never,  was 
a more  honorable  act  done  by  a government  or  a nation.  (Ap- 
plause and  cries  of  “Hear!  Hear!”)  Before  that  incident  of 
the  Russian  fleet  firing  upon  British  fishermen  in  the  North  Sea 
with  fatal  effect,  should  we  not  have  said  that  such  an  outrage 
would  be  held  to  have  stained  the  honor  of  England,  and  that 
the  stain  could  only  be  washed  out  in  blood?  England  found 
another  way  to  wash  out  that  stain — a better  way.  (Applause.) 
If  there  were  no  other  outcome  of  this  Congress  than  this, — 
that  we  offered  to  the  world  a new  definition  of  national  honor, 
it  would  be  enough.  The  duellist’s  notion  of  wiping  out  a stain 
on  his  honor  by  killing  or  wounding,  is  the  one  which  has  pre- 
vailed among  nations.  We  need  a purer,  juster  and  more  gen- 
erous idea  of  honor.  We  need  to  associate  with  honor  and 
courage,  gentleness  and  justice.  We  should  all  abandon  this 
barbaric  notion  of  wiping  out  a stain  on  our  honor  by  shedding 
innocent  blood.  (Applause.) 

Time  forbids  that  I go  further.  I trust  that  I have  indi- 
cated practical  measures,  practical  extensions  of  principles  and 


390 


practices  already  at  work  in  the  world.  We  need  not  class  our- 
selves with  visionaries,  with  people  who  hope  for  the  impossible. 
We  desire  to  class  ourselves  with  men  and  women  who,  seeing 
how  much  has  been  done  wisely  and  effectively  for  the  promotion 
of  Peace,  say — Let  us  go  and  do  likewise — only  more.  (Ap- 
plause.) 

Mr.  Carnegie: 

Ladies  and  gentlemen,  the  Secretary  will  now  read  letters 
and  telegrams  from  the  crowned  heads  of  the  world. 

(Mr.  Ely  read  selections  from  the  letters  and  telegrams 
found  on  later  pages.) 

Mr.  Carnegie: 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Peace  and  Arbitration 
Congress  : I think  it  is  time  that  we  were  getting  a proper  conceit 
of  ourselves  (laughter)  according  to  these  messages. 

Now,  I have  an  announcement  to  make  to  you.  A gentle- 
men who  has  made  an  address  at  the  other  banquet — and  I am 
informed  that  there  were  even  more  people  at  that — as  many 
at  least  as  there  are  hereV— has  kindly  consented  to  come 
over  and  deliver  the  last  speech  of  the  evening.  I take  pleasure 
in  calling  upon  him  because  at  London  at  the  Conference  of  the 
Interparliamentary  Union,  he  rendered  a great  service  to  the 
cause  of  Peace  by  a suggestion  which  had  Shakespeare’s  line 
in  view, 

“Upon  the  heat  and  flame  of  thy  distemper  sprinkle  cool 
patience.” 

And  this  suggestion  is  that  before  going  to  war,  or  committing 
any  hostile  act,  there  shall  be  time  taken  to  produce  patience. 
I have  great  pleasure  in  calling  upon  the  Honorable  William 
Jennings  Bryan  to  address  the  meeting.  (Great  applause,  the 
audience  rising  as  Mr.  Bryan  took  the  platform.) 

Mr.  Bryan: 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : In  looking  over 
the  program  and  the  list  of  speakers  I find  that  you  have  heard 
some  diplomats ; that  you  have  heard  representatives  of  the  wage- 
earners  in  the  factories;  that  you  have  heard  from  the  distin- 
guished educator  of  Massachusetts;  and  your  Chairman  repre- 


391 

sents  the  industrial  portion  of  our  country,  so  I do  not  know 
why  you  should  add  a name  to  your  list  of  speakers,  unless  you 
feel  that  the  list  has  not  covered  all  of  the  great  industries  of  the 
country.  I am  sure  that  I am  not  here  to  speak  as  a diplomat, 
for  I have  not  always  been  diplomatic.  (Laughter.  Applause.) 
I hardly  think  I am  here  to  speak  for  labor,  although  I have 
worked  rather  hard  for  several  years.  (Laughter.)  I hardly 
think  I am  expected  to  speak  as  an  educator,  although  I have 
been  engaged  in  educational  work — but  with  indifferent  success. 
(Laughter.)  I do  not  know  why  I am  called  to  speak  unless 
it  is  to  represent  the  great  agricultural  section  of  the  country. 
(Applause.) 

I have  several  capacities  in  which  I might  speak.  I might 
speak  as  a lawyer,  although  the  statute  of  limitations  has  run 
against  my  profession.  (Laughter.)  I might  speak  as  a poli- 
tician who  has  at  last  secured  the  most  permanent  title  that  one 
can  have  in  this  country — the  title  of  “Ex.”  (Laughter.  Ap- 
plause.) I might  speak  as  a newspaper  man,  though  in  the  pres- 
ence of  great  editors  of  great  dailies  they  might  mis-spell  the 
name  of  my  little  weekly  newspaper.  (Laughter.) 

But  if  I speak  as  a farmer  I can  speak  for  a very  large  class 
of  people,  the  largest  individual  class,  and  for  those  who,  prob- 
ably, more  than  any  other  class,  bear  the  heaviest  part  of  war’s 
burdens  and  enjoy  the  least  part  of  war’s  glories. 

But  I am  not  going  to  speak  as  the  representative  of  any 
class.  In  the  closing  of  this  extraordinary  assembly  I desire 
rather  to  leave  a thought  that  I believe  to  be  an  appropriate  one 
for  us  to  carry  away  with  us.  Upon  the  hearth  of  an  English 
home  the  word  “others”  is  inscribed,  and  the  more  I have  thought 
of  it  the  more  it  has  grown  upon  me.  The  word  “others”  is  an 
important  word.  It  marks  the  boundary  line  between  self  and 
the  world.  Not  until  one  has  learned  to  know  that  there  are 
others  is  he  lifted  out  of  himself  and  brought  into  vital  contact 
with  society.  (Applause.)  The  knowledge  of  man’s  relations 
to  his  fellows  is  an  important  knowledge  and  unless  I mistake 
the  definition  of  progress,  we  may  measure  man’s  advancement 
by  his  conception  of  the  meaning  of  the  word  “others.”  I do 
not  expect  that  we  shall  reach  the  point  where  man  will  not  think 
of  himself.  I believe  we  cannot  improve  upon  the  plans  of  the 
Almighty;  and  when  the  Creator  made  each  one  custodian  of 


392 

himself,  made  each  one  the  guardian  of  his  own  interests,  He 
intended  that  we  should  care  for  our  lives  and  for  all  that  per- 
tains to  our  lives. 

But  there  are  two  kinds  of  selfishness — the  selfishness  of  the 
man  who  would  lift  himself  up  upon  the  prostrate  forms  of 
others,  and  the  selfishness  of  a man  who  would  lift  himself  up  by 
lifting  up  the  level  on  which  all  stand.  (Applause.)  I do  not 
expect  selfishness  to  be  eliminated  from  the  human  race.  Aye, 
more  than  that,  I believe  that  the  highest  form  of  selfishness,  the 
broadest  regard  for  one's  self,  is  to  be  found  in  the  obedience 
to  the  command,  “Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself.” 
(Applause.)  For  only  by  the  recognition  of  the  rights  of  others 
are  we  sure  that  our  own  rights  will  be  protected.  We  have 
been  so  linked  together  that  no  one  can  consider  himself  sepa- 
rate and  apart  from  those  about  him.  We  know  not  at  what 
moment  our  lives  may  touch  in  vital  contact  the  lives  of  others. 
We  know  not  how  our  selfishness  may  react  upon  ourselves,  or 
how  our  generosity  may  return  to  bless  us  a thousandfold. 

It  is  fortunate  that  we  are  thus  made  a part  of  an  indis- 
soluble whole,  that  we  are  all  bound  together  by  ties  that  we 
cannot  break,  and  it  is  evidence  of  man’s  advancement  that  he 
plans  beyond  the  day  and  takes  into  consideration  those  who  live, 
not  only  without  his  home,  but  in  other  lands  as  well.  The  savage 
will  not  plant  a tree,  because  he  must  wait  for  the  fruit.  He 
will  shoot  the  bird,  because  he  can  see  it  fall.  But  civilized  man 
lays  to-day  the  foundations  upon  which  future  generations  will 
build.  (Applause.)  And  the  best  foundation  that  man  can  lay 
is  the  foundation  that  is  laid  in  justice,  for  the  government  that 
rests  upon  justice  is  the  only  one  that  has  promise  of  perpetuity. 
(Applause.) 

Reference  has  been  made  to-night  to  the  message  that  came 
to  the  world  when  Christ  was  born,  “Peace  on  earth,  good-will 
toward  men.”  I recalled  that  passage  a few  years  ago,  when  we 
were  about  to  celebrate  a Christmas,  and  then  my  thoughts  ran 
back  to  the  prophecy  in  the  Old  Testament,  when,  several  hun- 
dred years  before  the  coming  of  Christ,  He  was  described  as 
“The  Prince  of  Peace.”  I went  back  to  refresh  my  memory,  and 
I found  the  prophecy  as  I had  recalled  it,  but  I found  another 
verse  that  I had  forgotten,  and  I will  give  you  the  substance  of 
it  for  fear  that  some  of  you  may  be  as  “rusty”  upon  the  passage 


393 

as  I was.  Just  after  the  coming  Messiah  is  described  as  the 
“Prince  of  Peace”  it  says : “Of  the  increase  of  his  government 
and  peace  there  shall  be  no  end  ....  and  upon  his  kingdom 
to  order  it,  and  to  establish  it  with  judgment  and  with  justice 
from  henceforth  even  forever.”  This  is  the  foundation  of 
perpetual  government.  As  a nation  is  just,  it  is  strong;  as 
injustice  finds  place  in  a nation’s  object,  it  becomes  weak,  and 
justice  bids  us  recognize  the  claims  of  others  upon  us.  And  yet, 
my  friends,  after  all, "justice  is  rather  a negative  virtue  than  a 
positive  one,  and  I am  glad  that  there  is  in  this  world  something 
warmer  and  more  generous  than  justice.  I am  glad  that  brotherly 
love  goes  beyond  justice,  and  I believe  we  are  entering  upon 
an  era  where  brotherly  love  is  to  be  more  manifest  than  it  has 
been  in  the  past. 

I am  not  stating  an  original  proposition.  I am  not  bidding 
you  believe  it  upon  my  authority.  Thirteen  years  ago  a great. 
Frenchman,  Dumas,  said  he  thought  he  saw  the  beginning  of 
a new  era  when  mankind  was  to  be  seized  with  the  passion  of 
love,  that  we  were  to  enter  upon  an  era  of  brotherhood.  And 
Tolstoy  in  Russia,  two  years  later,  quoted  what  Dumas  said, 
and  gave  it  his  endorsement.  I believe  that  Dumas  was  right. 
I believe  that  Tolstoy  was  right.  And  within  the  last  few  years 
I have  seen  more  evidence  than  ever  before  of  this  new  era  of 
brotherhood. 

Charles  Wagner,  the  author  of  “The  Simple  Life,”  told 
me  that  he  had  sold  more  of  his  books  in  this  country  than  in 
any  other  country,  and  I thought  it  was  a compliment  to  our 
country,  for  “The  Simple  Life”  is  a protest  against  the  material- 
ism that  makes  man  the  servant  of  his  possessions,  and  is  an 
eloquent  plea  for  the  spiritual  life  that  makes  man  mark  out  a 
career  in  keeping  with  the  divine  law  and  destiny.  (Applause.) 

Peace  is  not  only  one  of  the  fruits  of  this  era  of  brother- 
hood, but,  reacting  upon  society,  Peace  hastens  the  realization  of 
brotherhood. 

I have  one  suggestion  that  I want  to  make,  that  we  shall 
lay  the  foundations  for  a permanent  Peace.  You  have  heard  the 
suggestion  of  the  distinguished  educator  from  Harvard  in  regard 
to  publicity  between  nations  and  the  making  of  people  better 
acquainted  with  each  other.  I believe  with  him.  My  friends, 
within  the  last  two  or  three  years,  I have  been  impressed  with 


394 

the  belief  that  the  best  way  this  nation  can  protect  itself  from 
danger  from  without  is  to  make  people  in  other  lands  acquainted 
with  our  country,  acquainted  with  our  people  and  acquainted 
with  our  institutions.  (Applause.)  And  if  we  would  spend  ten 
per  cent,  of  the  amount  we  spend  on  warships  and  on  navies, 
in  establishing  colleges  here  to  which  we  would  invite  the  youth 
of  all  the  lands  of  the  world,  representatives  to  be  educated  here 
at  our  expense,  and  send  them  back  with  our  ideals  and  a love  of 
our  people,  we  would  protect  our  nation  from  attack  more  surely 
than  by  all  the  “Dreadnoughts’’  that  we  could  put  upon  the 
waters.  (Great  applause  and  cries  of  “Good!  Good!”) 

Let  me  therefore  suggest  that  the  purpose  of  this  meeting 
is  not  only  to  present  the  advantages  of  Peace,  but  to  present 
means  and  methods  by  which  Peace  can  be  promoted.  One  of 
the  first  things  is  the  substitution  of  ideals  of  Peace  for  ideals 
of  war.  One  of  the  methods  is  to  teach  that  the  way  to  over- 
come evil  is  not  with  force  but  to  substitute  something  better 
for  it.  And,  my  friends,  we  will  find  no  better  authority  than 
we  will  find  in  the  Good  Book,  which  says : “Be  not  overcome 
of  evil,  but  overcome  evil  with  good.”  Tell  me  that  you  can 
only  overcome  evil  with  force ! I say  to  you,  if  we  can  convince 
the  world  of  our  good  intentions,  if  we  can  convince  the  world 
of  our  attachment  to  the  world,  if  we  can  convince  the  world  of 
our  altruism,  we  will  make  friends  of  the  other  nations.  I believe 
to-day  America  has  more  altruism  in  it  than  any  other  country 
in  the  world.  I believe  that  to-day  our  nation  is  doing  more  in  a 
disinterested  way  for  mankind  than  any  other  nation  in  the  world. 
And  if  any  of  you  feel  that  we  are  to  make  our  impress  through 
commerce  or  through  armies  or  navies,  I reply  to  you  that  the 
people  whom  this  nation  sends  abroad  without  noise,  without 
celebration,  who  separate  themselves  from  their  friends  and  bury 
themselves  in  dark  continents,  because  their  hearts  are  full  of 
love  for  humankind,  these  people  who  carry  high  ideals  and  open 
schools,  are  doing  more  for  the  world  than  we  will  ever  do  by 
showing  new  methods  of  killing  people  or  new  methods  of 
increasing  the  destructiveness  of  a single  man’s  arm.  (Applause.) 

And  there  is  this,  my  friends,  that  the  money  we  spend  in 
this  way  not  only  helps  those  on  whom  we  spend  it,  but  it  helps 
those  who  spend  it  also.  For,  unless  every  philosopher  who  has 
spoken  upon  the  basis  of  Christian  morality  is  at  fault,  every 


f jyjE 

Us 

SSUfi 

Hr  'w  1 - >•-' 

k if,‘  .7^  tPHt 

MB  I y . jo 

' TS’jflH^ 

lL’ . j|HH 

From  Stereograph,  Copyright  1907,  by  Underwood  & Underwood,  New  York. 

The  Banquet,  Wednesday  Evening,  April  17th,  at  Hotel  Astor 


395 

man  who  does  an  unselfish  act  is  blessed  in  proportion  as  his  act 
blesses  others.  And  we  who  gather  to  promote  the  cause  of 
Peace  will  be  rewarded  if  we  succeed,  not  only  in  the  bringing 
of  Peace  to  others,  but  in  bringing  a Peace  unto  ourselves.  We 
have  our  national  ideals,  and  in  the  past  we  have  erected  monu- 
ments that  have  indicated  what  our  ideals  were.  I am  satisfied 
that  there  is  a growth  in  ideals. 

I saw  upon  the  walls  of  a temple  in  Egypt  the  picture  of  a 
monarch  who  held  in  one  hand  the  hair  of  a group  of  captives, 
and  in  the  other  hand  he  raised  a club  to  strike  a blow.  What 
monarch  to-day  would  permit  himself  to  be  thus  pictured  in  his 
own  land?  (Applause.)  There  has  been  improvement,  and  yet 
I have  seen,  even  in  modern  times,  monuments  reared,  made  of 
cannons  captured  in  war,  a glorifying  of  a victory  over  a fallen 
foe.  I believe  the  time  will  come  when  we  will  get  beyond  the 
rejoicing  that  gives  visible  evidences  of  our  having  put  other 
people  to  death.  (Applause  and  cries  of  “Hear!  Hear!”) 

I visited  Windsor  Castle  a few  years  ago  and  I saw  a piece 
of  statuary.  It  was  a piece  placed  there  after  the  death  of  Queen 
Victoria’s  husband.  I do  not  know  who  the  artist  was,  but  I 
think  that  it  embodied  a more  beautiful  idea  than  was  embodied 
in  the  “Greek  Slave”  or  in  the  “Winged  Victory.”  It  repre- 
sented the  Queen  and  her  husband,  standing  together,  he  with 
one  arm  about  her  waist  and  the  other  hand  pointing  upwards, 
and  beneath  it  said : “Lured  to  brighter  lands,  and  led  the  way.” 
Let  the  emblems  of  our  nation  rather  picture  helpful  service 
than  triumph  by  force,  and  I know  of  no  better  emblem  for  any 
nation  than  an  emblem  that  will  picture  us  as  going  forward  in 
every  good  work  and  leading  others  with  us  and  loving  them 
and  being  loved  by  them.  I thank  you.  (Great  applause.) 

Mr.  Carnegie:  We  will  all  join  in  the  singing  of  “My 
Country,  ’Tis  of  Thee.” 

(The  audience  rose  and  joined  in  the  hymn.) 

Mr.  Carnegie  : Good  night ! Good  night ! 

(The  audience  responded  to  Mr.  Carnegie’s  salutation  and 
the  banquet  came  to  an  end.) 


396 


THE  BANQUET  AT  THE 
WALDORF-ASTORIA 

Wednesday  Evening,  April  Seventeenth 
HON.  SETH  LOW  Presiding 


Mr.  Low  : 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : On  behalf  of  the  Committee  of 
Arrangements,  I welcome  you  here  this  evening.  You  know 
it  is  said,  and  I believe  it  to  be  true,  that  there  is  no  moment 
at  which  a man  is  so  likely  to  be  at  Peace  with  all  the  world  as 
after  a good  dinner.  (Laughter  and  applause.) 

I hope  that  is  equally  the  case  with  the  ladies  present. 
(Laughter.)  As  I recall  the  days  of  controversy  that  have 
marked  the  different  meetings  of  the  Peace  Congress,  it  is  no 
small  satisfaction  to  the  presiding  officer  to  know  that  the 
speeches  made  on  this  occasion  are  to  be  made  under  such 
favorable  auspices.  I feel  it  to  be  my  duty,  however,  to  give  you, 
or  to  sound,  two  notes  of  warning,  to  the  speakers  of  the 
evening.  The  first  is  that  if  there  is  any  disagreement  with  the 
Chairman,  the  matter  shall  be  referred  to  the  Hague  Tribunal. 
(Laughter  and  applause.)  If,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  only  a 
difference  between  themselves,  they  may  settle  it  as  they  please. 
(Applause  and  laughter.) 

The  second  suggestion  is  made  necessary  by  the  number  of 
speakers  to  whom  we  hope  to  have  the  pleasure  of  listening 
before  the  evening  is  over.  Some  are  to  come  to  us  from  the 
other  dinner.  Earl  Grey,  for  example,  and  Mr.  Bryce,  are  both 
expected  here  later  in  the  evening.  (Applause.)  The  Baron 
d’Estournelles  de  Constant  and  Mr.  Bryan,  after  speaking  here, 
will  go  to  the  Hotel  Astor  to  speak  there.  Somebody  says  that, 
“a  fair  exchange  is  no  robbery.”  (Laughter  and  applause.)  I 
hope  that  the  people  at  the  Astor  will  think  that  they  have  made 
a fair  exchange,  as  we  of  the  Hotel  Waldorf  feel  that  we  are 
giving  a very  good  equivalent  for  what  we  shall  get.  (Laughter 
and  applause.) 


397 

But,  after  viewing  the  list  of  the  speakers  who  are  to 
address  you,  I think  I must  point  out  the  moral  of  my  next 
warning  through  the  guise  of  an  anecdote ; it  is  of  a Boston  girl 
of  whom  I have  always  been  very  fond.  (Laughter  and  ap- 
plause.) She  was  riding  in  the  cars — in  the  street-car,  reading 
her  Emerson,  with  her  muff  by  her  side;  she  was  not  particu- 
larly conscious  of  a Harvard  student  sitting  by  her,  until  she 
suddenly  felt  his  hand  clasping  hers  in  her  muff.  She  looked 
up  from  her  page  for  a moment  and  caught  his  eye,  and  said, 
“Sir,  I will  give  you  just  ten  minutes  to  take  your  hand  out  of 
my  muff.”  (Laughter  and  applause.)  I think  there  is  no  neces- 
sity of  making  the  application  any  more  direct  to  the  speakers 
who  are  to  follow  me. 

My  conception  of  the  duty  of  the  Chairman,  however,  is 
not  that  he  is  to  make  a speech.  He  is  only  to  open  the  way  for 
those  who  are  to  do  the  speaking. 

I shall  ask  time,  only,  therefore,  to  set  before  you  one 
question  for  your  reflection.  You  remember,  I am  sure,  Stock- 
ton’s conundrum  of  the  Lady  and  the  Tiger.  I want  to  put  a 
conundrum  before  you.  When  Tennyson  wrote  that  immortal 
line  about  “The  parliament  of  man,  the  federation  of  the 
world,”  was  it  a poet’s  dream  or  a poet’s  vision?  A good 
many  will  tell  you  it  was  only  a dream,  but  I want  to  give  you 
my  reason  for  believing  it  was  a vision,  and  give  it  in  the  words 
of  James  Russell  Lowell : in  the  words  which,  in  his  poem  on 
Columbus,  he  put  into  the  mouth  of  the  great  discoverer,  as 
he  soliloquized  upon  the  deck  of  his  ship  on  that  fateful  day 
which  his  sailors  agreed  to  give  him  before  they  insisted  upon 
turning  back : that  day  which  sufficed  to  discover  a new  world. 

“For  I believed  the  poets,  it  is  they 
Who  gather  wisdom  from  the  central  deep 
And  listening  to  the  inner  flow  of  things, 

Speak  to  the  age  out  of  eternity.” 

That  is  why  I believe  Tennyson’s  immortal  lines  were  a vision 
and  not  a dream. 

I have  now  the  very  great  pleasure  of  presenting  to  you 
my  dear  friend,  Baron  d’Estournelles  de  Constant,  who  goes  from 
us  to  the  other  dinner. 


398 

Baron  d’Estournelles  de  Constant: 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : I wish  my  dear  friend,  the  Hon. 
Seth  Low,  would  have  delivered  this  speech  for  me ; it  was  such 
an  agreeable  thing  for  me  to  listen  to  him,  and  it  is  difficult  for 
a foreigner  to  have  to  thank  you  in  English  for  your  kind  recep- 
tion,— I do  not  say  to  address  you,  but  to  try  to  address  you  in 
English. 

While  I was  sitting  here  at  the  table  I was  thinking  of  the 
duty  of  that  expression,  of  the  duty  I have  to  fulfil,  and  I remem- 
bered the  story  all  of  you  certainly  know  very  well,  but  which 
I did  not,  the  story  of  poor  Daniel  in  the  lion’s  den.  It  has 
been  told  to  me  here,  and  I find  it  very  fine,  especially  to-night. 
I could  see  that  poor  Daniel,  who  had  been  sent  down  to  the 
lion’s  den.  The  cruel,  barbarian  king  was  looking  at  him,  sur- 
prised to  see  that  Daniel  was  not  displeased  at  all,  but  that  he 
seemed,  on  the  contrary,  very  happy.  The  king  was  rather 
disappointed.  He  thought  Daniel  would  cry,  and  ask  for  mercy. 
Not  at  all ! The  king  said,  “What  is  the  matter  with  you, — why 
are  you  so  pleased  now?”  “Great  king,”  replied  Daniel,  “it  is 
because  I know  that  there  will  be  no  speeches  when  the  meal 
is  over.” 

I must  try  to  express  the  feeling  of  gratitude  that  we  for- 
eigners will  all  take  back  to  our  own  countries  after  your  splen- 
did reception.  It  is  something  more  than  gratitude.  Without 
willingly  flattering  you  I want  to  tell  you  that  we  have  had  a 
double  supply  with  what  we  have  seen  in  America ; such  a splen- 
did gathering  of  the  representatives  of  the  government,  of  the 
public  powers,  of  all  the  branches  of  American  activity, — all  to 
greet,  to  applaud  this  idea  of  Arbitration,  of  Peace,  of  the 
organization  of  the  Peace  Movement.  That  means  a great  deal. 
That  means  a great  progress  achieved  for  me.  How  different 
it  was  only  a very  few  years  ago.  When  I was  at  school  we 
were  only  speaking  of  such  things,  and  now  wonderful  things 
may  happen  in  a very  few  years. 

Five  or  six  years  ago  the  people  who  ought  to  have  encour- 
aged this  idea  of  arbitration  and  justice,  and  the  application 
of  arbitration  to  war,  preferred  to  laugh  at  it.  They  preferred 
not  to  believe  in  it,  and  affairs  might  have  gone  on  like  that 
possibly  years  more,  but  for  the  American  people,  who  gave 


399 

another  turn  to  the  ideas,  and  more  than  a turn, — a good  exam- 
ple,— and  now  this  example  of  your  great  country  has  been  so 
well  understood  that  almost  all  the  governments,  almost  all 
of  the  people,  who  were  against  the  idea  of  arbitration,  believ- 
ing that  it  was  a dream,  are  now  quite  favorable.  They  have 
no  doubt  about  it.  They  are  as  sure  of  the  future  as  they  were 
skeptical  in  the  past.  This  is  a great  result.  I never  realized  it 
so  fully  as  I did  to-day  and  yesterday.  Yes,  chiefly  yesterday. 
I saw  one  thing  that  I had  not  thought  of  speaking  about  here, 
but  really  I found  it  so  fine, — it  was  the  full  realization  of  all 
my  hopes.  I saw  not  only  the  Government  representatives,  not 
only  representatives  of  all  the  commercial,  industrial  and  agri- 
cultural branches  of  America,  I saw  all  the  children  of  New 
York,  (applause)  ready  to  understand, — so  wonderfully  ripe 
for  this  new  idea,  which  has  been  born  fresh  just  as  they  have 
been  born  themselves.  They  are  contemporary,  it  seems  quite 
natural  to  them.  When  I saw  all  these  charming  boys  and  girls, 
so  full  of  confidence,  so  full  of  faith,  when  I saw  that,  then  I 
had  a true  vision  of  the  future,  T had  a certitude  which  I never 
had  before.  I think  our  children  are  almost  ashamed  to  believe 
that  ten  years  ago  the  things  which  seem  so  natural  to  them, 
so  humanely  good,  were  considered  a dream  and  impossible  to 
realize.  When  I saw  the  faces  of  those  children  I had  a feeling 
that  I could  go  back  to  France  satisfied  that  my  journey  was 
finished,  that  I could  go  back  to  France  with  the  best  and  strong- 
est lesson  possible  to  give  to  my  people.  I should  say  to  them : 
“You  people  of  Europe,  you  don’t  mean  to  say  that  you  do  not 
believe?  Why,  the  children  over  there  in  America — they  believe 
they  know.”  (Applause.) 

Now,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  I know  that  you  are  all  very 
busy  here,  even  at  the  table.  (Great  laughter.)  That  is  one 
of  the  things  that  I cannot  really  get  accustomed  to  in  America, 
that  I can  never  have  dinner  without  making  at  least  two  speeches. 

But  you  will  understand  that  it  is  not  enough  for  us  that 
progress  has  been  realized.  There  is  something  more  to  do. 
We  must  be  grateful  to  the  people  that  have  helped,  to  those  who 
are  responsible  for  this  change. 

Among  the  many  people  I see  here,  among  the  many  friends 
who  have  given  their  cordial  help,  the  help  of  their  energy,  of 


400 

their  initiative,  I want  to  name  first  our  Chairman.  I mean 
the  Chairman  of  the  Congress,  Monsieur  Andrew  Carnegie. 
(Applause.)  He  has  really  done  such  good  work  in  giving  all 
his  strength,  and  all  his  good-will,  in  the  organization  of  this 
splendid  and  striking  manifestation.  It  is  not  the  first  time  that 
Monsieur  Carnegie  has  given  time  and  help  to  the  cause  of 
Peace  and  Arbitration.  He  did  something  five  years  ago  that  has 
had  a very  good  effect  and  which  has  contributed  to  the  great 
change  I was  speaking  of.  He  saw  that  among  the  reasons 
why  the  people  would  not  believe  in  the  future  of  a Hague  Court 
of  Arbitration  was  that  the  poor  Court  had  no  home.  (Laughter.) 
It  is  a fact  almost  extraordinary  that  for  the  baptism  of  the 
most  magnificent  palaces  of  princes,  for  instance,  they  fire  salutes 
of  artillery,  they  give  splendid  feasts  of  inauguration,  but  the 
Hague  Court  has  never  been  inaugurated,  for  the  very  good 
reason  that  the  Hague  Court  had  no  home.  Monsieur  Carnegie 
thought  it  would  be  a very  good  idea  to  give  the  Hague  Court 
a home,  and  he  gave  the  splendid  palace  which  is  to  be  built  now. 
That  has  been  a gift  not  only  to  the  friends  of  Peace,  but  to  all 
the  Governments  that  have  participated  in  the  conferences  at  The 
Hague.  The  Governments  have  been  happy  to  receive  that  gift, 
and  I know  at  least  one  government  which  has  been  happy  not 
only  to  receive,  but  which  would  like  to  show  its  gratitude  for 
that  gift.  I am  happy  to  tell  you  that  I received  very  good 
news  to-day  which  is  one  of  the  reasons  why  I have  to  leave  you 
to  go  to  the  other  banquet. 

The  Government  of  the  French  Republic  remembered  that 
one  of  the  principles  of  our  great  movement  has  been  that  it 
is  not  enough  for  a man  to  be  a good  citizen  of  his  own  country, 
he  has  to  try  to  be  a good  citizen  of  the  world,  and  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  French  Republic  thought  that  Monsieur  Carnegie 
had  done  his  duty  not  only  as  a citizen  of  the  United  States,  but 
as  a citizen  of  the  world,  and  asked  me  to  give  him  as  a reward, 
as  a particular  distinction,  this  gift  of  the  French  Government, 
and  the  title  of  Commander  of  the  Legion  of  Honor.  (Great  ap- 
plause.) 

I must  tell  you  very  frankly  that  I love  my  country  very 
much,  I love  the  French  Republic,  but  I am  especially  proud 
and  pleased  to-night  of  what  my  Government  has  done.  (Ap- 
plause.) It  is  a great  pleasure  to  me,  a great  and  good  duty 


401 

to  fulfil.  I am  very  happy  to  see  and  to  find  a proof  that  it 
is  not  only  we,  friends  of  Peace,  not  only  we  friends  of  inter- 
national justice,  faithful  friends  who  have  struggled  in  the  past, 
but  the  Governments  themselves  who  want  to  be  right,  want  to 
be  just  in  giving  the  right  reward  to  the  men  who  have  done 
their  work,  and  given  their  time,  and  their  energy,  and  their 
good-will  to  the  great  cause  of  International  Arbitration. 
(Applause.) 

Mr.  Low: 

It  does  not  make  any  difference  to  a Frenchman  whether  he 
speaks  in  his  own  language,  or  whether  he  speaks  ours.  (The 
Baron  d’Estournelles  here  interrupted  by  saying:  “Oh,  I speak 
much  better  in  French.”)  I dare  say  the  Baron  d’Estournelles 
could  express  himself  much  better  in  the  French  language,  but 
he  could  not  give  utterance  to  any  more  beautiful  or  noble  sen- 
timents than  he  has  expressed  here  to-night  in  English.  (Ap- 
plause.) 

(The  Baron  d’Estournelles  here  remarked,  “Ah,  Monsieur 
President,  you  must  not  spoil  me.”) 

We  of  America,  whether  we  learn  the  language  of  France 
or  not,  can  very  profitably  take  a lesson  of  her,  I think,  in  the 
nice  art  of  courtesy  which  the  Baron  has  so  beautifully  illus- 
trated in  the  international  recognition  given  by  France  to  Mr. 
Carnegie. 

I now  have  the  pleasure  of  calling  upon  one  who  is  the 
representative  of  our  oldest  university.  Perhaps  I may  be  per- 
mitted to  say,  as  one  who  for  a time  was  connected  with  univer- 
sity life  in  this  city,  that  it  has  always  been  the  greatest  possible 
pleasure  and  happiness  to  all  of  us  who  have  had  to  do  with 
universities  to  realize  how  superbly,  under  the  leadership  of 
President  Eliot,  Harvard  University  has  maintained  her  primacy, 
has  maintained  the  primacy  that  is  hers  by  reason  of  her  age ; 
it  has  been  delightful  to  march  in  the  column  in  which  she  stood 
leader.  To-night  it  affords  me  very  great  pleasure  to  introduce 
to  you  Kuno  Francke,  of  Harvard  University,  who  will  now 
speak  to  you. 

Professor  Francke  : 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : I do  not  wish  to  appear  to  you 
under  false  colors.  It  happens  that  on  this  very  day  there  is 


26 


402 

coming  out  a little  book  of  mine  entitled  “German  Ideals,”  in 
which  among  other  things  I attempt  to  show  the  wide  difference 
of  temperament  and  thought  which  separates  the  cosmopolitan, 
idealistic  and  unpractical  Germany  of  the  days  of  Kant  and 
Schiller,  from  the  intensely  national,  realistic  and  practical  Ger- 
many of  to-day.  And,  although  an  American  citizen  by  adoption, 
I should  be  false  to  my  own  blood  if  I did  not  rejoice  in  the 
astounding  revival  of  national  vitality,  the  superabundance  of 
national  activity,  which  has  characterized  the  last  thirty  years 
of  German  history.  The  point  which  I wish  to  make  is  this: 
that  this  astounding  revival  of  German  national  activity  is  by  no 
means  confined,  as  is  often  supposed,  to  military  prowess,  or 
scientific  experimentation,  or  industrial  enterprise.  We  have 
heard  of  late  altogether  too  much  of  the  gigantic  strides  taken 
by  Germany  in  these  directions.  We  have  heard  altogether 
too  little  of  the  spiritual  awakening  that  has  been  the  concomitant 
phenomenon  of  this  material  development.  The  spiritual,  the 
philosophical  and  artistic  ascendency  of  Germany  during  the  last 
thirty  years  has  been  as  marked  and  as  rapid  as  her  political  and 
her  commercial  advance,  and  every  step  in  this  onward  movement 
has  brought  Germany  closer  to  other  nations,  has  helped  the 
cause  of  international  understanding. 

Germany  has  always  been  willing  to  learn  from  other  nations. 
She  has  always  had  her  door  wide  open  for  every  stimulating 
thought,  every  noble  sentiment  that  demanded  entrance  at  her 
gates.  Her  present  spiritual  revival  may  indeed  be  said  to  be 
due  primarily  to  foreign  influences.  To  indicate  the  extent  to 
which  the  higher  life  of  contemporary  Germany  has  been  stimu- 
lated by  great  personalities  of  other  nations,  it  may  be  sufficient 
to  mention  four  commanding  names.  An  Englishman,  Charles 
Darwin,  has  contributed  more  than  any  other  man  toward  the 
shaping  of  what  may  be  called  the  German  lay  religion — that 
religious  belief  which  conceives  of  the  Universe  as  one  living 
whole,  as  a continual,  endless  striving  for  higher  forms  of  exis- 
tence, as  an  unbroken  and  ever-ascending  line  of  spirituality. 
A Russian,  and  a Frenchman, — Tolstoy,  the  spiritual  father  of  all 
modern  mankind  (applause),  and  Zola,  the  incomparable  cham- 
pion of  social  justice  and  right, — have  done  more  than  any  other 
two  men  to  stir  the  German  masses  with  sympathy  for  the  down- 
trodden and  disinherited,  with  zeal  for  social  reform,  with  the 


403 

conviction  of  the  solidarity  of  the  working  people  the  world 
over.  The  greatest  Norwegian  of  our  time,  the  old  Viking, 
Henry  Ibsen,  the  indomitable  fighter  for  individuality  and  truth, 
has  impressed  himself  upon  no  other  country  as  deeply  as  upon 
Germany.  And  nowhere  have  his  teachings  found  the  same 
response,  nowhere  are  his  dramas  being  performed  to  equally 
intelligent  and  sympathetic  audiences,  or  with  equal  artistic 
understanding  as  in  Leipsic,  Munich  and  Berlin. 

So  much  for  great  personalities  from  abroad  who  have  been 
received  into  spiritual  communion  with  modern  Germany.  But 
Germany  is  also  being  profoundly  affected  and  inwardly  stirred 
by  great  popular  movements  from  abroad.  From  among  these 
popular  movements  let  me  single  out  two,  which  may  be  called 
America’s  contribution  to  German  life:  the  woman  movement 
and  the  cause  of  educational  reform.  That  both  of  these  causes 
also  strongly  make  for  international  understanding  is  obvious 
at  first  sight.  The  salient  point  of  the  German  school  reform 
lies  in  the  emphasis  put  by  the  progressive  educators  of  Ger- 
many upon  the  study  of  the  modern  world,  modern  languages, 
modern  history,  modern  art,  and  literature  and  thought.  Isn’t 
it  clear  that  an  education  based  upon  these  principles,  an  edu- 
cation which  makes  the  growing  generation  intellectually  at 
home  with  the  dominant  ideals  of  the  leading  nations  of  to-day, 
isn’t  it  clear  that  such  an  education  must  help  in  preventing,  or  at 
least  allaying,  international  misunderstanding  and  animosities? 
For  how  could  a man  who  had  become  truly  at  home  in  the 
spiritual  world,  at  least  of  England,  of  France,  Germany,  or 
America,  fail  to  recognize  the  close  interdependence  of  the  great 
modern  nations,  how  could  he  but  be  filled  with  a desire  to  con- 
tribute on  his  part  toward  their  mutual  understanding  and 
friendly  devotion  to  a common  cause? 

As  to  the  German  woman  movement,  it  has  a dominant 
note  of  sympathy  with  life  in  all  its  forms,  and  of  affectionate 
regard  for  individuality;  an  intense  zeal  for  the  rights  of  the 
weak  and  oppressed;  of  earnest  striving  for  the  peaceful  regen- 
eration of  the  world.  All  of  this  has  found  one  of  its  most 
characteristic  expressions  in  the  lifework  of  that  noble  woman 
whose  name,  and  whose  work,  is  familiar  to  you  all — the  Baroness 
Von  Suttner — whose  appeals  for  disarmament  have  certainly 


404 

disarmed  scores  of  critics  and  re-echo  in  thousands  of  human 
hearts. 

Germans  all  over  the  world,  whether  German  subjects  or  not, 
admire  and  are  proud  of  the  devoted  and  courageous,  high- 
minded  activity  of  the  German  Emperor.  They  see  in  him  the 
typical  representative  of  the  restless  striving  of  modern  Ger- 
many for  high  achievement,  and  of  its  remarkable  responsive- 
ness to  ideal  impulses.  For  nothing,  I believe,  are  they  more 
grateful  to  him  than  for  the  fact  that  he  has  lost  no  opportunity 
for  showing  his  keen  desire  to  cultivate  friendly  relations  with 
all  other  nations.  His  habitual  recognition  of  men  of  talent  and 
eminence,  whether  English,  French,  Russian,  Italian  or  Ameri- 
can, his  ardent  interest  in  the  exchange  of  professors  between 
German  and  American  institutions  of  learning,  his  splendid  gifts 
to  Harvard  University,  are  only  a few  expressions  of  this  fun- 
damental desire,  the  desire  of  the  German  people  for  a con- 
stantly growing  friendliness  and  intimacy  of  international  inter- 
course. 

Let  me  close  by  giving  to  this  desire  one  particular  appli- 
cation. No  greater  blessing,  it  seems  to  me,  can  come  to  modern 
civilization  than  that  the  happily  correct  and  friendly  relations 
which  now  exist  between  Germany,  France  and  England  should 
more  and  more  be  strengthened  into  a firm  and  indissoluble 
friendship.  If  we  reflect  what  these  nations  have  given  to  each 
other;  if  we  think  of  France’s  brilliant  initiative  in  all  matters 
spiritual,  intellectual  and  artistic;  of  England’s  political  genius 
and  marvelous  power  of  organization;  of  Germany’s  depth  of 
feeling  and  philosophical  grasp,  it  seems  impossible  to  think 
that  these  nations  should  not  henceforth  always  and  forever 
stand  together  enriching  each  other,  and  working  together  for 
the  good  of  mankind.  (Applause.)  The  American  people, — an 
Ueber-Volk , so  to  speak, — uniting  in  itself  the  Anglo-Saxon, 
the  Teutonic  and  the  Romance  racial  types,  wishes  for  nothing 
more  devoutly  than  for  such  an  alliance  as  this,  an  alliance  into 
which  America’s  own  natural  instinct  would  draw  her  also,  mak- 
ing it  irresistible  and  inviolable. 

Mr.  Low: 

Professor  Francke  has  done  us  a real  service,  I think,  in 
calling  our  attention  from  the  most  obvious  thing  to  that  which 


405 

lies  behind  it.  We  so  often  think  of  Germany  as  an  armed 
nation,  that  we  forget  sometimes  that  the  leader  of  that  nation 
has  constantly  shown  himself  a friend  of  Peace;  and  we  often 
forget,  what  we  in  the  University  world  never  should  forget, 
that  Germany  has  carried  beyond  every  other  nation  two  ideas 
that  are  essential  to  the  making  of  great  universities : first,  the 
right  of  the  teacher  to  be  free  in  what  he  says.  The  teacher  is 
expected  to  be  true  to  the  truth  he  sees,  but  he  is  thought  of 
as  false  to  it  if  he  dare  not  give  expression  to  what  he  believes. 
(Applause.)  And  because  of  this  conception  of  the  university 
professor  in  Germany,  it  consequently  follows  that  the  German 
student  is  equally  at  liberty  to  learn.  He  may  ask  any  question 
of  any  of  the  sciences,  and  refuse  to  be  satisfied  with  the  voice 
of  authority  upon  any  subject,  because  being  a student  he  is 
free  to  learn,  free  to  question,  free  to  think.  Now,  a nation  that 
sets  no  limit  to  freedom  in  the  intellectual  world,  is  the  last  of 
all  the  nations  not  to  welcome  Peace  among  men  (applause), 
because  a breach  of  the  Peace  in  itself  is  a limitation  of  freedom 
for  the  time  being;  but  Germany  holds  up  before  our  eyes  con- 
tinually that  illuminating  torch. 

Now,  I have  great  pleasure  in  presenting  to  you  another 
speaker,  who,  after  speaking  here,  will  speak  to  our  friends  at 
the  Hotel  Astor.  I might  say  many  things  of  him;  but  all  I 
want  to  say  to-night  is,  that  in  his  speech  this  afternoon  I thought 
he  placed  this  movement  on  a remarkably  high  plane,  and  left 
it  there, — left  it  as  a beacon  upon  the  mountain,  to  give  us 
courage  to  walk  in  the  right  direction,  even  when  we  cannot 
see  very  clearly  beyond  our  next  step.  I have  pleasure  in  pre- 
senting Hon.  William  Jennings  Bryan. 

Mr.  Bryan: 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : This  Peace  Congress  has  at  least 
served  one  purpose.  It  has  shown  us  that  the  nations  which  keep 
large  armies  out  of  supposed  fear  of  each  other,  and  build  large 
ships  for  the  supposed  purpose  of  fighting  each  other  are,  after 
all,  quite  good  friends  when  you  bring  them  together,  and  have 
a free  outspoken  expression  of  opinion.  I*  think  this  is  a useful 
purpose.  It  cannot  fail  to  have  a good  effect.  And  the  manner 
in  which  these  representatives  have  slyly  admitted  to  each  other 
the  deep  affection  that  they  have  been  feeling  for  each  other  for 


406 

a long  while,  reminds  me  of  a little  story  I heard  a couple  of  years 
ago  in  the  South. 

A very  bashful  young  fellow  had  courted  his  girl  for  a year 
before  he  had  the  courage  to  propose  to  her.  One  evening  he 
told  her  that  he  loved  her,  and  asked  her  to  marry  him.  She  was 
a very  frank  sort  of  a girl,  and  said,  “Why,  Jim,  I have  been 
loving  you  all  these  many  months,  and  I have  just  been  waiting 
for  you  to  tell  me  so  I could  tell  you.”  Jim  was  overcome  with 
delight,  and  he  went  out  and  looked  up  at  the  stars,  and  said, 
“Oh,  Lord,  I ain’t  got  nothin’  ’gin  nobody.” 

Now,  after  we  have  heard  the  representatives  of  the  different 
nations  tell  how  long  they  have  entertained  this  secret  affection, 
how  impatiently  they  have  waited  for  a chance  to  express  them- 
selves, we  can  feel  that  we  might  close  this  Peace  Congress  by 
unanimously  declaring  that,  “We  just  ain’t  got  nuthin’  ’gin 
nobody.”  (Applause.) 

In  thinking  of  a subject  which  would  be  appropriate  for 
this  evening,  it  occurred  to  me  that  there  is  no  subject  more 
intimately  connected  with  the  subject  of  Peace  than  the  subject 
of  human  life.  I think  it  is  because  the  world  is  coming  to  have 
a larger  view  of  human  life,  and  the  value  of  the  individual  to 
the  world,  that  it  looks  with  increasing  dread  upon  the  slaughter 
of  mankind.  I know  the  people  sing  of  the  glory  of  war.  They 
tell  us  of  the  heroic  deeds,  they  speak  of  the  inspiration  that  this 
higher  act  of  human  sacrifice  brings  to  the  world,  but  the  burden 
of  proof  is  on  the  advocate  of  war  to  show  that  war’s  blessings 
exceed  its  evils.  It  is  not  sufficient  that  we  should  count  merely 
the  good  drawn  from  the  lives  of  warriors;  we  must  count  the 
cost  that  war  has  brought  to  the  human  race.  Who  will  measure 
that  cost?  Who  will  put  an  estimate  upon  the  millions  of  lives 
that  have  been  sacrificed  upon  the  battlefield?  Who  will  place  a 
money  value  upon  the  millions  of  men  who  have  died  in  camp, 
and  on  the  march?  Where  shall  we  begin  to  estimate  the  value 
of  a life?  Shall  we  begin  with  the  life  of  some  one  unknown 
to  us,  or  with  the  life  that  is  intimately  connected  with  our  own? 
If  we  would  understand  what  war  has  cost,  let  us  measure  the 
affection  we  have  fo‘r  our  own  children  and  multiply  it  by  the 
number  who  have  fallen  in  battle.  What  is  a life  worth?  What 
even  is  the  life  of  a child  worth?  A child!  Why,  before  it 
can  lisp  a word  it  has  brought  to  one  woman  the  sweet  con- 


407 

sciousness  of  motherhood,  and  to  one  man  the  new  strength  that 
added  responsibility  imposes.  Before  its  hand  can  lift  a feather’s 
weight  it  has  drawn  two  hearts  nearer  together,  and  the  prattle 
of  its  innocent  tongue  echoes  through  two  lives.  Who  will  meas- 
ure the  value  of  this  child?  When  the  child  grows  up  there 
is  not  one  day  in  all  its  life  that  it  does  not  make  its  impress 
upon  the  world,  and  who  will  set  the  limit  to  the  influence  that 
it  exerts?  Shall  we  measure  the  value  of  the  lives  that  war  has 
cost?  Let  us  measure  the  value  of  the  lives  that  war  has  left 
us,  and  by  the  value  of  those  that  remain  we  can  estimate  the 
value  of  those  that  have  been  taken. 

Think,  if  you  will,  how  much  one  human  being  has  added 
to  this  world’s  history.  There  was  a time  when  people  saw  in 
the  lightning  nothing  but  that  which  would  terrify,  but  one  man 
conceived  the  thought  that  this  lightning  might  be  brought  from 
the  clouds  and  made  the  messenger  of  man,  and  now  the  news 
of  each  day’s  doings  is  flashed  around  the  world.  For  cen- 
turies people  had  watched  the  escaping  steam  with  no  thought 
of  its  value  until  one  had  a vision  of  its  power,  and  now  steam 
is  made  to  draw  the  burdens  of  the  world,  and  has  united  the 
continents  until  they  are  closer  to-day  than  communities  were  a 
century  ago.  Can  you  measure  what  man  has  wrought?  I have 
spoken  of  two  inventions,  but,  my  friends,  the  impressions  that 
one  man  may  make  upon  the  heart  of  the  world  are  greater  than 
the  value  of  inventions.  Is  it  a wonderful  thing  that  by  means 
of  the  telegraph  instrument  we  can  send  messages  10,000  miles 
away?  The  achievements  of  the  heart  are  greater  still.  The 
heart  that  is  full  of  love  for  its  fellows,  the  heart  that  yearns  to 
do  some  great  good,  the  heart  that  yearns  to  put  into  operation 
some  great  movement  for  the  uplifting  of  the  human  race  will 
speak  to  hearts  that  will  speak  to  hearts  10,000  years  after  all 
our  hearts  are  still.  Who  will  measure  the  value  of  one  human 
life  to  the  world?  What  would  have  been  the  world’s  loss  had 
Gladstone  been  lost  upon  the  battlefield  in  the  vigor  of  his  youth  ? 
What  would  literature  have  lost  had  Shakespeare,  as  a boy,  gone 
out  to  give  his  life  in  war?  Measure,  if  you  will,  what  we  owe 
to  Schiller  and  Goethe,  or  what  we  owe  to  Victor  Hugo,  or  to 
Pasteur.  Measure,  if  you  can,  the  value  of  Jefferson  and  Lin- 
coln, and  then  tell  me  how  much  the  world  would  have  lost  had 
these  great  spirits  gone  away  while  their  possessors  were  in  their 


408 

youth,  patriotically  giving  themselves  for  things  that  they  con- 
sidered just.  (Applause.) 

How  shall  we  measure  the  cost  of  war  ? Let  the  advocate  of 
bloodshed  come  forth  with  his  figures,  and  prove  if  he  can,  that 
the  blessings  brought  by  war  are  greater  than  its  cost.  Tell  me 
that  liberty  is  more  precious  than  life!  Yes,  but  why  shall  we 
take  the  alternative  of  liberty  or  death?  Why  not  liberty  and 
life?  Not  liberty  or  death!  (Applause.)  Is  war  necessary? 
Has  God  so  made  us  that  we  shall  degenerate  if  we  do  not  have 
an  occasional  blood-letting?  Who  thinks  so?  If  any,  let  him  tell 
us  about  how  often  we  must  have  war  in  order  that  we  may 
have  a more  rapid  growth.  How  often  must  we  kill  in  order 
that  we  shall  not  become  effeminate?  If  this  theory  that  war  is 
necessary  for  human  development  is  a sound  one,  then  some- 
times, in  cases  where  wars  are  too  far  apart,  we  must  go  to 
shooting  each  other  rather  than  risk  the  possibility  of  degenera- 
tion. Who  will  say  that  war  is  necessary  to  human  develop- 
ment? I deny  it!  War  is  not  a necessity!  I could  not  worship 
God  with  the  zeal  I do  if  I thought  that  He  made  my  advance- 
ment depend  upon  my  taking  my  brother’s  life.  (Applause.) 
I prefer  to  believe  that  war  is  but  the  evil  that  man  in  his  imper- 
fection has  brought  into  the  world,  and  is  not  a necessary  part 
of  the  Divine  plan.  (Applause.)  I prefer  to  build  society  upon 
the  doctrine  of  human  brotherhood  rather  than  upon  the  doc- 
trine of  hatred  and  ill-will.  (Applause.)  And,  we  shall  not 
have  done  what  we  ought  to  do  in  this  Congress,  and  in  similar 
ones,  if  we  do  not  as  a result  of  our  deliberations  give  a new 
impulse  to  this  feeling  of  brotherhood. 

Surely  the  effect  of  these  meetings  must  be  to  draw  us 
closer  together  in  the  bonds  of  sympathy,  and  make  each  more 
interested  in  the  other’s  welfare.  With  civilization,  with  prog- 
ress, with  rising  morality,  there  must  be  a clearer  conception 
of  the  extended  relations  which  we  bear  to  all  others.  First, 
there  is  the  self,  and  the  selfishness.  Next,  there  is  the  family 
and  the  family  tie,  then  the  tribe  and  the  tribal  attachment.  Then 
comes  the  nation  with  its  national  spirit,  a larger  world,  where 
all  humanity  is  knit  together  in  indissoluble  bonds.  A poet  has 
described  an  incident  in  the  Civil  War.  He  tells  how  in  a fierce 
battle  a soldier  thrust  his  bayonet  through  a soldier  in  the  oppos- 
ing lines,  and  when  he  stooped  to  draw  the  bayonet  out,  he 


409 

discovered  he  had  killed  his  own  brother.  He  saw  that  the  blood 
upon  his  hands  was  the  blood  of  one  reared  about  the  same  fire- 
side, and  he  was  overcome  with  horror  to  think  that  he  had 
taken  his  brother’s  life.  It  is  a pathetic  story ! But,  my  friends, 
are  they  only  your  brothers  who  claim  the  same  father  and 
mother?  Shall  we  limit  by  so  narrow  lines  our  attachments 
and  our  kinship?  God  speed  the  day  when  we  shall  so  recog- 
nize the  power  that  binds  each  human  being  to  every  other 
human  being  that  we  shall  see  in  everyone  that  bears  the  image 
of  the  Creator  a brother,  and  shall  shudder  as  much  to  take  his 
life  as  to  take  the  life  of  one  who  lived  within  the  walls  of  the 
same  home.  (Applause.) 

Mr.  Low: 

It  is  a striking  thought  that  the  very  word  “justice,”  and 
the  thing  itself,  had  their  origin  in  the  Roman  forum,  on  the 
pavement  before  the  Roman  Senate  House.  Wherever  the 
Roman  arms  went  they  carried  with  them  the  Roman  law; 
the  Pax  Romana,  the  peace  of  Rome;  and  the  Roman  justice. 
And,  broadly  speaking,  as  long  as  Rome  stood  for  justice  the 
Roman  arms  flourished.  The  thing  I want  to  ask  you  to  con- 
sider to-night  is,  that  for  more  than  fifteen  hundred  years  the 
arms  of  Rome  have  ceased  to  be  a terror;  but  the  Roman  law, 
the  Roman  love  of  justice  prevails  over  all  the  continent  of 
Europe  this  day,  and  in  our  own  State  of  Louisiana.  So  that 
what  we  have  to  consider  as  enduring,  is  not  so  much  war  as 
justice.  The  question  that  was  asked  in  this  Congress  is,  whether 
we  cannot  obtain  justice  in  better  ways  than  upon  the  battle- 
field. Certainly  the  Roman  justice  has  outlived  the  Roman  arms, 
and  the  day  is  coming,  we  gladly  think,  when  the  decisions  upon 
international  controversies  given  in  a court  of  justice  will  com- 
mand more  enduring  respect  than  decisions  had  upon  the  battle- 
field. I do  not  suppose  that  any  of  us  are  so  sanguine  as  to 
think  that  from  this  time  on  there  will  be  no  war;  but  we  are 
certainly  right  in  thinking  that  precisely  as  public  opinion  is 
encouraged  to  demand  justice  by  the  methods  which  have  out- 
lived Rome,  and  which  Rome  has  thus  established,  by  just  so 
much  we  hasten  the  day  when  justice,  and  not  force,  will  rule 
among  the  nations  of  the  earth.  (Applause.) 

It  seems  to  me  that  we  ought  to  see  here  the  face  of  the 


4io 

new  commander  of  the  Legion  of  Honor,  and  I am  going  to 
ask  Mr.  deLima  if  he  will  not  suggest  to  Mr.  Carnegie  to  favor 
this  company  with  his  presence  for  a few  moments.  He  will 
have  a welcome  that  will  do  his  heart  good.  May  I do  that 
with  the  authority  of  this  company?  (Cries  of  “Yes!  Yes!”) 

It  is  evidently  not  necessary  to  ask  for  the  other  side. 

It  now  gives  me  very  great  pleasure  to  present  to  this  com- 
pany one  who  makes  his  home  in  the  Mississippi  Valley,  but  a 
man  who  is  at  home  on  the  Atlantic  no  less  than  there,  and  a 
man  who  is  at  home  on  the  Pacific  no  less  than  here;  a man 
whom  we  always  listen  to  with  respect  and  attention — the  Most 
Reverend  John  Ireland,  Archbishop  of  St.  Paul. 

Archbishop  Ireland: 

We  have  listened  to  speakers  pronouncing  many  names — 
names  to  which  the  world  owes  a tribute  on  behalf  of  Peace. 
I now  pronounce  a name  higher  than  all  others,  a name  to  which, 
more  than  to  all  others,  the  world  is  indebted  for  Peace  and  for 
all  that  leads  to  Peace.  It  is  most  fitting  that  in  a Congress  of 
Peace  the  name  be  spoken,  the  name  of  Christ  Jesus,  the  Saviour 
of  men,  the  Master  of  the  Christian  religion. 

Before  His  coming  prophets  had  called  Him  the  “Prince  of 
Peace.”  At  His  birth  angels  sang  “Glory  to  God  in  the  highest, 
and  on  earth  peace,  good-will  toward  men.”  Christ  brought  into 
the  world  the  high  principles  which  make  for  Peace,  and  since 
His  day  the  Christian  Church  has  perpetually  preached  and 
enforced  those  principles.  Whatever  efforts  we  make,  whatever 
movements  we  set  on  foot,  we  need  to  bring  into  them  great  and 
high  principles.  Principles  take  hold  of  the  mind  and  the  heart 
of  man,  and  propel  him  upon  the  great  pathway  toward  which  he 
is  bidden  to  march.  If  we  seek  Peace,  we  must  believe  in  the 
principles  preached  by  Christ.  Allow,  for  a moment,  man  to  be 
mere  matter,  a mere  animal,  grown  accidentally  into  power,  and 
into  intelligence — why  should  he  sacrifice  himself  for  the  sake 
of  Peace?  Why  should  he  strive  for  the  good  of  others?  The 
leading  motives  in  his  life  will  be  self-interest;  the  great  rule 
which  will  dominate  him  in  the  arena  of  action  will  be  the  victory 
of  the  strongest.  Take  man,  individually  or  collectively,  take 
the  individual,  the  family,  the  nation,  humanity  at  large,  and 
tell  all  to  look  up  to  the  great,  living  eternal  intelligence,  in  whose 


411 

image  all  are  created,  who  is  the  Master  and  the  Judge  of  all;  tell 
all  men,  all  nations,  to  question  that  great  intelligence  as  to 
what  is  their  duty,  and  you  have  laid  deeply  into  their  souls 
the  foundations  of  Universal  Peace.  Christ  spoke  for  all  ages, 
saying : “ When  you  pray  say  ‘Our  Father  which  art  in  Heaven.’  ” 
No  other  enunciation  great  as  this  has  ever  been  made ; no  other 
could  ever  be  made,  as  leading  to  Peace.  If  God  is  our  Father, 
we  are  brothers  one  of  another,  members  of  one  family.  We  are 
not  simply  brothers  to  those  of  our  immediate  family,  to  those 
of  our  own  nation;  we  are  brothers  to  members  of  all  other 
families;  we  are  brothers  to  the  children  of  all  nations.  Na- 
tional frontiers  become  slender  lines  when  in  the  light  of  the 
Fatherhood  of  God,  and  of  the  Brotherhood  of  Man,  we  look 
across  humanity.  However  divided  men  are  by  mountain  ranges, 
by  seas  or  oceans,  they  are  still  brothers,  obliged  by  the  com- 
mand of  their  common  Father  to  love  one  another,  to  serve  one 
another,  to  refrain  from  doing  harm  to  one  another.  This  is  the 
great  principle  of  Christ’s  religion ; the  principle  that  makes  most 
powerfully  for  Peace  between  men  and  between  nations. 

The  Gospel  of  Christ  is  essentially  a gospel  of  mercy,  a 
gospel  of  justice,  a gospel  of  righteousness.  When  men  by 
themselves,  or  through  nationalities,  are  guilty  of  injustice,  they 
become  amenable  to  the  high  tribunal  of  the  Almighty;  the 
thought  of  the  Almighty  bids  them  pause,  as  the  thought  of  no 
other  power  that  may  be  built  up  before  their  soul.  Let  us 
establish  justice  between  nations;  let  us  teach  humanity  that 
to  take  from  another  nation  that  which  duly  belongs  to  it  is 
a crime  before  the  Almighty,  and  a stop  is  put  to  a large 
number  of  wars  likely  to  desolate  the  land.  What  usually  are 
the  causes  leading  to  war?  Not  infrequently  foul  ambitioil,  the 
thirst  for  the  expansion  of , territory,  the  wish  to  avenge  an 
imaginary  insult,  the  ambition  of  greed,  the  spirit  of  vengeance — 
sentiments  and  purposes  most  sinful  before  the  Almighty,  most 
severely  reproved  by  His  law.  If  you  wish  Peace  among 
nations  you  must  bring  before  them  the  great  principles  that 
proclaim  justice,  charity  and  righteousness;  bring  before  them 
the  Almighty  power,  higher  than  all  power  in  humanity,  that 
commands  justice  and  charity.  This  is  what  Christ  preached, 
a gospel  of  Righteousness,  of  Justice,  of  human  Brotherhood, 
and  from  the  earliest  days  of  the  Christian  religion  Peace  began 


412 

to  shine  upon  humanity  as  it  never  had  before.  War  did  not 
at  once  disappear.  It  takes  years  and  ages  for  principles  to 
germinate  and  bear  fruit;  but  the  principles  and  the  signs  of 
Peace  were  visibly  on  the  earth  from  the  very  first  ages  of  the 
Christian  religion.  In  Paganism  war  was  absolute  cruelty;  it 
was  death  or  slavery  to  be  the  prisoner  of  war.  Wherever  the 
Christian  religion  went  the  principles  of  Justice  and  of  Peace 
grew  stronger  and  deeper.  If  to-day  public  opinion  has  come 
to  deprecate  war  as  it  never  did  before  we  must  see  in  this 
beneficent  growth,  the  expansion  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  If 
even  the  nations  that  had  not  known  Christ  are  to-day  willing 
to  show  mercy  in  war,  they  have  learned  the  lesson  of  love  from 
the  nations  over  which  has  shone  the  Light  of  Christ’s  Gospel. 

We  should  not  say  that  Christ’s  Gospel  makes  war  a crime 
in  all  cases.  Conditions,  we  must  ever  admit,  may  be  found 
when  a nation  has  no  other  remedy  for  the  ills  that  threaten 
it  than  to  make  war,  as  conditions  may  be  found  for  the  indi- 
vidual that  authorize  him  to  defend  himself  even  with  the  iron 
hand.  As  the  world  is  constituted  to-day  war  at  times  may  be 
necessary,  but  the  spirit  of  the  Christian  religion  is  ever  impel- 
ling us  to  so  ameliorate  our  conditions  that  war  will  not  be 
necessary.  You,  members  of  the  Peace  Congress,  are  obeying 
the  spirit  of  the  Christian  religion,  the  spirit  of  Christ’s  Gospel, 
when  you  propose  a high  tribunal  of  justice,  which  in  days  of 
Peace  and  in  days  of  war  will  proclaim  what  is  right  and  what 
is  wrong,  and  will  impress  upon  the  nations  the  duty  to  do  ever 
what  is  right,  and  to  avoid  ever  what  is  wrong,  without  incurring 
the  perils  of  bloodshed,  the  misery  and  the  death  of  the  battle- 
field. The  Peace  Congress  is  a wondrous  assemblage;  it  is  per- 
meated with  the  spirit  of  Christ’s  Gospel.  As  one  of  Christ’s 
ministers  I bid  you  onward.  Never  falter  in  the  noble  work 
which  you  have  taken  in  hand  until  there  is  established  the  parlia- 
ment of  man,  where  justice  speaks,  where  recourse  to  the  battle- 
field is  forever  forbidden. 

The  more  we  have  of  Christ,  the  more  we  will  obey  the 
law  of  justice  and  of  love.  The  more  the  nations  are  deeply 
and  thoroughly  Christianized  the  more  strongly  are  they  bound 
to  the  great  idea  of  Peace.  When  in  our  love  for  our  nation  we 
seek  its  advance  in  higher  civilization,  when  we  strive  to  secure 
for  it  happiness  and  prosperity,  and  to  establish  over  its  broad 


413 

fields  a reign  of  justice  and  of  love,  let  us  know  that  our  first 
duty  is  to  build  up  in  the  hearts  of  its  citizens  a holy  religion. 
The  nearer  we  come  to  the  sky,  the  more  ethereal  become  our 
aspirations,  the  more  angelic  we  are,  the  nearer  we  are  to  God. 
What  we  need  is  not  so  much  commercial  houses,  great  and 
powerful  cities,  what  we  need  above  all  else  is  the  inner  culture 
of  the  soul  that  will  bring  out  the  divine  that  is  in  it.  The  deeper 
religion  is  in  the  hearts  of  the  people,  the  more  surely  will 
Peace  reign — Peace  in  the  mind  and  heart  of  the  individual, 
Peace  in  the  family,  Peace  in  the  nation,  Peace  with  all  men, 
Peace  with  all  nations.  Woe  to  the  land  where  Christ  becomes 
neglected  and  unknown.  Woe  to  mankind  and  to  humanity  when 
the  message  brought  by  the  angel  is  no  longer  taught:  “Glory 
to  God  in  the  highest  and  on  earth  peace,  good-will  toward  men/’ 

Mr.  Low : 

I have  received  a telegram  from  Consul-General  Massiglia, 
of  Italy,  saying  that  although  absent  in  person  he  is  present  in 
spirit,  as  one  who  has  all  his  life  practiced  conciliation. 

Nothing  has  taken  place  upon  this  continent  which  is  of 
more  interest  than  the  steady  growth  of  order  and  prosperity 
in  our  neighboring  Republic  of  Mexico;  and  we  all  recognize 
that  in  its  President,  Mr.  Diaz,  we  see  a truly  great  man.  His 
Excellency,  Senor  Enrique  C.  Creel,  the  Mexican  Ambassador  to 
the  United  States,  is  with  us  to-night,  and  is  the  special  repre- 
sentative of  President  Diaz  on  this  occasion,  and  I ask  him  if 
he  will  not  kindly  address  us.  (Applause.) 

Senor  Creel  : 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  I am  proud  to  say  that  I have 
two  messages  to  convey  to  you  which  are  exceedingly  gratifying 
to  me.  I have  just  come  from  the  great  banquet  at  the  Astor, 
where  we  have  been  exceedingly  happy,  where  all  have  enjoyed 
themselves  in  the  most  magnificent  way. 

Here  I am,  located  in  one  of  the  most  artistic  and  beautiful 
spots  of  New  York,  and  one  which  is  decorated  by  the  most 
beautiful  and  charming  decorations  which  we  could  have, — by 
hundreds  of  American  ladies,  in  whose  blue  eyes,  and  in  the 
bright  brown  eyes  of  Kentucky,  which  are  so  well  known  the  world 
over,  and  in  the  black  eyes  of  the  Roman  race,  and  the  Latin  race, 


414 

which  are  so  interesting,  and  in  the  eyes  of  all  I can  see  reflected 
the  light  of  that  inspiration  of  the  great  ideal  which  they  all 
cherish,  in  which  they  all  rejoice, — what  the  Peace  Congress  is 
doing  to  establish  Peace  in  the  world.  (Applause.) 

The  news  of  arbitration  has  reached  my  country,  has  reached 
Mexico.  It  was  received  by  cheers  from  the  Mexican  people. 
It  had  a warm  response  from  the  President,  who  instructed  me  to 
appear  as  his  representative  and  Ambassador,  to  come  to  these 
two  banquets  and  to  express  his  views,  which  are  in  full  accord 
with  the  plans  of  this  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress.  (Ap- 
plause.) He  was  asked  to  be  present,  and  regretted  exceedingly 
that  he  could  not  on  account  of  his  official  duties,  the  courts  now 
being  in  session;  but  he  is  with  us  in  spirit,  for  he  is  one  of  the 
great  Peacemakers  of  the  world.  He  has  received  with  sym- 
pathy the  news  of  the  good  feeling  of  the  American  people,  and 
the  important  letter  which  was  read  at  the  gathering  of  the 
National  Congress  of  Peace  and  Arbitration, — the  letter  of 
your  honorable  President,  Mr.  Roosevelt,  and  the  remarkable 
speech  that  was  delivered  by  his  Secretary  of  State,  Mr.  Root. 
President  Diaz  regarded  that  as  something  very  noble,  something 
very  important.  We  also  regarded  it  as  something  important  that 
no  place  was  found  large  enough  for  all  the  people  expected  at 
these  banquets,  people  who  are  here  in  sympathy  with  the  move- 
ment of  Peace.  There  is  reason  for  this  great  city  of  New  York 
to  rejoice,  this  great  metropolis  of  America,  whose  capital,  whose 
energy,  whose  initiative,  have  contributed  so  largely  to  the  won- 
derful development  of  this  great  country.  Besides  its  efforts  in 
economical  and  industrial  ways  it  has  been  crowned  with  the 
love  of  Peace.  That  is  why  we  are  all  rejoicing.  It  is  true 
that  the  treaty  of  international  arbitration  has  not  yet  been 
signed,  but  the  next  step  onward  has  been  taken.  The  initiative 
of  the  American  people,  the  great  interest  which  they  have  taken, 
is  influencing  the  important  powers  of  the  European  con- 
tinent, and  every  move  in  public  opinion,  every  move  in  the 
press,  every  move  of  wise  and  scientific  men,  is  a strong  indica- 
tion that  we  are  going  on  the  right  line  to  accomplish  what  we 
all  wish, — International  Arbitration  and  the  Peace  of  the  human 
family. 

In  this  country  this  movement  has  for  its  head  a very  noble 
character,  a man  who  had  a brilliant  career  as  an  industrial  and 


415 

business  man,  and  who  after  accomplishing  wonders  along  these 
lines  and  building  a fortune  which  went  into  many  millions  of 
dollars,  is  now  working  on  a higher  standard,  interested  in  the 
welfare  of  his  fellow-citizens  and  in  humanity,  and  in  all  the 
people  of  the  world.  You  will  recognize  that  I am  speaking 
of  Mr.  Carnegie,  of  that  noble  character  who  has  a universal 
reputation,  of  that  one  man  who  is  being  loved  by  the  people 
of  two  continents,  and  that  man  who  is  setting  an  example  for 
many  people  to  follow,  and  whose  good  work  we  wish  may  have 
great  success.  (Applause.) 

Allow  me,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  to  propose  to  you  that  we 
shall  drink  to  the  health  of  Mr.  Carnegie,  a noble  man  who  is 
entitled  to  our  respect  and  to  our  consideration.  (Great  ap- 
plause The  guests  drank  to  the  toast.) 

Mr.  Low  : 

I am  sure  that  I speak  the  sentiments  of  this  audience  in 
thanking  the  Mexican  Ambassador  for  the  message  he  has 
brought  to  us  from  the  Mexican  Republic — from  President  Diaz. 
If  we  have  ever  doubted  before,  or  ever  failed  to  understand 
before,  why  Mexico  has  made  the  great  progress  in  recent  years 
that  she  has  made,  I am  sure  that  we  American  men  will  fail  no 
longer.  A nation  that  appreciates  so  thoroughly  the  eyes  of  our 
American  women  is  a nation  that  understands  the  wise  thing  to 
do.  (Laughter.) 

I am  going  to  call  upon  Mr.  John  Bassett  Moore,  of  Colum- 
bia University,  who  is  certainly  one  of  the  first,  if  not  the  very 
first,  of  the  authorities  upon  international  law  in  the  United 
States.  Those  of  us  who  know  him  well  delight  to  think  he  is 
one  of  the  foremost  in  the  entire  civilized  world. 

Professor  Moore  : 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  Your  honored  Chairman  has  by 
his  kind  introduction  raised  expectations  which  I feel  that  it 
will  be  very  difficult  for  me  in  reasonable  measure  to  meet.  I 
feel,  too,  that  coming,  as  I do,  after  eminent  speakers  who  have 
entertained  us  with  their  eloquence,  there  has  perhaps  fallen  upon 
me  the  duty  of  introducing  that  spice  of  discord  which  has  been 
supposed  to  characterize  all  the  meetings  of  this  Peace  Congress, 
and  which  our  honored  Chairman  has  intimated  that  we  might 


416 

have  before  the  evening  was  over.  I find  myself,  however,  in 
such  complete  accord  with  what  has  been  said  that,  if  I should 
attempt  to  disagree  with  anybody  I fear  it  would  have  to  be  with 
myself ; and  that,  I am  sure,  would  not  be  altogether  becoming. 

I was  delighted  when  I saw  the  Mexican  Ambassador  mount 
this  platform  a few  moments  ago  with  a message  from  the  Presi- 
dent of  his  country.  I am  justified  in  saying,  from  personal 
knowledge,  that,  among  the  many  good  things  for  which  Mexico 
is  distinguished,  one  of  the  best  is  the  high  character  of  the 
official  representatives  whom  our  sister  Republic  has  sent  to 
represent  her  in  this  country.  (Applause.)  It  was  my  good 
fortune,  my  happy  privilege,  to  know  somewhat  intimately,  for 
a number  of  years,  one  of  the  most  honored  predecessors  of  the 
present  Ambassador — the  Honorable  Matias  Romero ; a man 
whom  I esteemed  and  cherished  as  a friend,  whom  I respected  as 
a diplomatist,  and  whom  I honored  as  one  who,  while  intensely 
loyal  to  his  own  land,  possessed  that  fine  sense  of  equity  which 
enabled  him  to  appreciate  the  fact  that  justice  is  to  be  found  not 
in  the  contentious  insistence  upon,  but  in  the  reconciliation  of, 
differences.  (Applause.) 

There  is  one  thing  that  has  specially  distinguished  the 
Congress,  whose  sessions  are  now  coming  so  pleasantly  to  a close, 
and  that  is,  that  it  has  presented,  not  a negative  program  con- 
sisting in  the  deprecation  and  denunciation  of  war,  but  a positive 
program  on  which  something  definite  may  be  accomplished  for 
the  adjustment  of  international  disputes  and  the  bringing  about 
of  just  results  through  legal  methods.  The  great  end  to  be 
striven  for  to-day  by  those  who  cherish  the  cause  of  Peace  is  the 
establishment  of  an  international  organization  which  shall  insure 
Peace  upon  the  basis/  of  legal  justice.  The  aspiration  after  the 
amicable  settlement  of  international  disputes  is  not  new.  But  it 
is,  on  the  other  hand,  equally  true  that  there  has  been  during 
the  past  hundred  years  a great  advance  among  nations  toward 
the  definition  and  establishment  of  principles  of  international 
law  and  the  adoption  of  co-operative  methods  for  their  enforce- 
ment. 

In  1815  the  Congress  of  Vienna,  besides  drawing  together 
more  closely  the  great  powers  of  Europe,  laid  down  important 
principles  with  regard  to  the  navigation  of  international  rivers 
and  with  regard  to  diplomatic  precedence  and  procedure.  The 


417 

Congress  of  Paris  of  1856  adopted  a declaration  on  the  subject 
of  maritime  law.  Then,  coming  down  to  a later  time  and  pass- 
ing over  many  other  important  international  conferences  we 
have,  in  1899,  the  great  Conference  at  The  Hague,  the  distinctive 
achievement  of  which  was  that  it  formulated  and  incorporated 
into  treaties  which  have  since  been  ratified,  codes  of  law  on 
various  subjects.  Among  these  codes  we  are  no  doubt  most 
familiar  with  the  convention  for  the  amicable  settlement  of  inter- 
national disputes,  by  international  courts  of  inquiry  to  investigate 
the  facts,  by  mediation,  and  lastly  by  arbitration.  And  now  it 
is  proposed  in  the  resolutions  adopted  by  the  present  National 
Congress,  just  as  it  was  proposed  in  the  resolutions  lately  adopted 
by  that  remarkable  body,  the  Interparliamentary  Union,  that  the 
constitution  and  powers  of  the  Hague  Court  shall  be  so  enlarged 
and  strengthened  that  it  shall  not  continue  to  be,  what  it  is  now, 
only  an  eligible  list  from  which  judges  may  be  chosen,  but  that 
it  shall  be  an  actual  court,  always  open  to  suitors  and  always 
ready  to  adjust  grievances  when  they  arise. 

Is  there  anything  impracticable  or  strange  in  this  proposal? 
To-day,  in  a spirit  of  curious  inquiry,  I ran  through  certain  vol- 
umes and  calculated  the  aggregate  of  years  during  which  the 
arbitral  tribunals  of  the  United  States  had  been  in  session.  Since 
we  began  our  national  existence  we  alone  have  had  with  other 
powers  more  than  sixty  arbitrations ; and  I found  that  the  total 
number  of  years  during  which  these  tribunals  had  sat  was  a 
hundred  and  twenty-five, — more  than  the  entire  duration  of  our 
national  existence  since  the  formation  of  the  Constitution.  The 
excess  of  aggregate  time  is  explained  by  the  fact  that  now  and 
then  there  were  two  or  three  tribunals  in  session  at  once.  It  is 
also  to  be  observed  that  the  total  expense  of  all  our  tribunals, — 
and  when  we  talk  about  Peace  we  always  become  very  econom- 
ical,— doubtless  was  greater,  far  greater,  than  would  have  been 
the  cost  of  an  actual  court  always  in  session. 

So  much  for  the  idea  of  permanency.  Let  us  now  consider 
the  classes  of  questions  that  have  been  adjusted  by  arbitration. 

I venture  to  say  that,  if  you  will  look  over  the  authentic  records 
of  our  arbitral  tribunals  you  will  find  that  there  is  scarcely  any 
sort  of  question  that  has  not  at  some  time  been  adjudicated  by 
one  of  those  bodies;  not  simply  mere  pecuniary  claims,  but 
claims  affecting  what  we  might  call  vital  interests  and  national 


27 


418 

honor.  Take,  for  instance,  the  case  of  the  Creole,  a case  that 
brought  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain  to  the  verge  of  war, 
and  that  afterward  almost  caused  a rupture  of  the  conferences 
between  Mr.  Webster  and  Lord  Ashburton,  in  1842;  a rupture 
which  would  almost  certainly  have  resulted  in  hostilities.  Who 
knows  to-day  what  became  of  the  case  of  the  Creole f Hardly 
any  one.  And  why?  Because  the  case  came  before  the  Tribunal 
of  Arbitration  under  the  treaty  of  February  7,  1853,  between 
the  United  States  and  Great  Britain,  and  was  disposed  of  so 
quietly  that  public  attention  never  was  drawn  to  the  litigation. 

Let  us  take  a later  illustration.  One  of  the  greatest  negotia- 
tions of  modern  times  was  that  which  resulted  in  the  settlement 
of  the  Alabama  Claims,  a negotiation  conducted  on  the  part  of 
the  United  States  by  a man  whose  name  ought  ever  to  be  held 
in  honor  by  Americans,  and  without  mention  of  whose  name 
no  Peace  Congress  ought  ever  to  adjourn — Hamilton  Fish.  (Ap- 
plause.) A man  who,  while  others  talked  of  Peace,  made  Peace 
and  averted  a deplorable  conflict.  When  the  adjustment  of  the 
Alabama  Claims  by  arbitration  was  first  proposed  to  the  British 
Government,  what  was  the  answer?  Lord  John  Russell  replied 
that  the  questions  involved  could  not  be  submitted  to  arbitration, 
because,  as  he  declared,  they  involved  the  honor  of  Her  Majesty’s 
Government,  of  which  Her  Majesty’s  Government  was  the  sole 
guardian.  And  yet  eight  years  afterward  those  very  questions, 
after  careful  examination  and  critical  formulation,  were  submitted 
to  the  Tribunal  at  Geneva,  and  finally  decided. 

Again,  what  is  to  be  said  as  to  the  pecuniary  values  that 
have  been  involved  in  these  arbitral  proceedings,  and  how  many 
cases  have  been  disposed  of  by  them?  I will  take  one  single 
illustration,  the  arbitral  commission  under  the  treaty  of  July  4, 
1868,  between  the  United  States  and  Mexico.  The  claims  of 
the  United  States  against  Mexico  before  that  commission  were 
more  than  one  thousand  in  number.  The  claims  of  Mexico 
against  the  United  States  were  nine  hundred  and  ninety-eight; 
in  all  there  were  more  than  two  thousand  claims.  And  the  total 
amount  involved  in  the  claims,  taking  their  face  value,  was  more 
than  half-a-billion  dollars.  One  single  claim  against  the  United 
States  involved  fifty  million  dollars,  and  a lawyer  so  good  as 
Caleb  Cushing  had  advised  the  Mexican  Government  that  it  was 
valid;  but  on  full  investigation  it  was  disallowed. 


419 

Now,  as  to  finality.  Out  of  all  the  arbitral  awards  to  which 
the  United  States  has  been  a party,  there  is  not  one  that  has  not 
been  carried  into  effect  without  the  concurrence  of  both  govern- 
ments. Now  and  then,  in  rare  cases,  after  the  proceedings  were 
over,  some  new  fact  has  been  discovered  or  some  circumstance 
disclosed  that  seemed  to  render  a modification  of  the  arbitrators' 
judgment  desirable;  but  on  all  such  occasions  the  parties  have 
proceeded  to  a final  adjustment  in  a spirit  of  justice  and  equity, 
and  have  eventually  arrived  at  a mutual  understanding. 

I once  heard  of  a great  teacher,  a famous  historian  and 
man  of  letters,  who  displayed  in  his  lecture  room  this  sentiment, 
“Above  all  nations  is  humanity."  In  the  display  of  this  senti- 
ment, he  neither  inculcated  nor  was  understood  to  inculcate  a 
want  of  devotion  to  one’s  own  land;  he  neither  deprecated  nor 
was  understood  to  deprecate  that  patriotic  feeling  which  has  in 
all  times  inspired  men  promptly  to  respond  to  their  country’s  call, 
whether  in  peace  or  in  war.  But  what  he  meant  was  simply  this, 
that,  as  every  man  owes  a duty  to  his  fellow-men,  so  nations 
owe  duties  one  to  another ; and  he  wished  to  create  in  his  hearers 
the  hope,  which  had  with  himself  become  an  intimate  conviction, 
that  the  time  would  come  when  the  perception  of  justice  by 
nations  would  be  so  clear,  when  their  recognition  of  each  other’s 
rights  would  be  so  quick,  so  full,  and  so  generous,  that  they 
would  look  upon  themselves  no  longer  as  enemies,  but  only 
as  friendly  rivals  in  the  course  of  humanity.  (Great  applause.) 

Mr.  Low : 

When  Henry  Ward  Beecher  spoke  in  Glasgow,  during  our 
Civil  War,  he  won  the  attention  of  his  audience  by  asking, 
“What  do  you  suppose  was  the  last  thing  my  wife  said  to  me 
before  I left  America?"  They  naturally  stopped  to  listen,  and 
he  said,  “She  said  to  me,  ‘Henry,  whatever  else  you  do  or  where- 
ever  else  you  go,  don’t  fail  to  visit  old  Scotland,  where  every 
loch  is  a poem  and  every  mountain  a monument.’ " 

I am  sorry  to  be  obliged  to  say  that  Mr.  Bryce,  the  Ambas- 
sador from  Great  Britain,  cannot  be  with  us.  Although  he  is 
President  of  the  Alpine  Club,  the  number  of  dinners  he  has 
been  called  upon  to  participate  in  by  a Peace  Congress  has  so 
tried  his  strength  that  he  is  not  able  to  come  here  this  evening. 
However,  he  has  sent  to  us  a most  welcome  representative  in 


420 

Sir  Robert  Cranston,  the  Lord  Provost  of  Edinburgh,  the  capital 
of  Scotland,  and  the  capital  of  that  fairyland  which  encircles 
the  world  and  is  dominated  by  the  spirit  of  Sir  Walter  Scott. 

Sir  Robert  Cranston  : 

Mr.  President,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : I think  you  all 
want  to  go  home,  and  I am  afraid  it  is  a bit  late  for  any  man 
to  arouse  any  assembly  of  this  kind  if  he  continues  to  speak  upon 
the  question  of  Peace. 

Perhaps  it  may  seem  strange  that  I should  come  here,  being 
for  over  forty-three  years  a citizen  and  a soldier,  to  speak  upon 
the  subject  of  Peace,  but,  I find  in  one  of  your  President’s 
addresses  namely,  William  Henry  Harrison,  the  following  words : 
“As  commander  and  defender  of  my  country’s  rights  in  the  field 
I trust  my  fellow-citizens  will  not  see  in  my  ardent  desire  to  pre- 
serve the  Peace  with  foreign  powers  any  indication  that  their 
rights  will  ever  be  sacrificed.”  I think  that  is  the  feeling  of 
every  man  to-day,  to  be  ready  and  willing  to  serve  as  a citizen 
or  as  a soldier  whichever  his  country  may  require.  But  at  the 
same  time  I am  perfectly  certain  that  I speak  the  feelings  of 
my  own  countrymen  when  I say  that  each  of  them  are  for  “Peace 
on  earth  and  good-will  toward  men.”  I know  here,  that  you  look 
upon  us  coming  from  the  Old  Country  as  being  a little  behind 
you, — we  are  behind  you  in  many  things ; nevertheless  we  are  the 
mother  country,  and  I think  that  if  any  country  leads  in  Peace 
Conferences  it  should  be  Great  Britain.  She  has  often  been 
spoken  of  as  the  mother  country;  therefore,  her  first  duty  is  the 
love,  guardianship  and  the  care  of  all  her  children  (applause)  ; 
if  she  is  to  be  the  mother  of  all  the  English-speaking  races  all 
over  the  world,  then  her  voice  first  should  be  heard  saying, 
“Peace  on  earth,  good-will  toward  men.”  I am  perfectly  certain 
that  this  is  the  feeling  of  the  great  bulk  of  the  nation.  Our 
hopes  are  that  this  Congress  will  do  good,  that  all  these  con- 
ferences will  do  good.  There  are  people  even  in  politics  and 
municipal  affairs  who  say,  “What  influence  have  I ?”  There 
have  been  gathered  together  in  the  City  of  New  York  six,  seven 
or  eight  thousand  people  during  the  last  four  days  discussing 
the  best  methods  of  obtaining  Peace.  “What  does  it  come  to  in 
the  end?”  someone  asks.  It  may  not  be  noticeable  to-night,  but 
these  people  go  out  to-morrow  bidding  farewell  to  each  other 


421 

after  having  talked  on  the  subject,  going  into  every  part  of  the 
world,  and  carrying  with  them  the  olive  branch  of  Peace,  demand- 
ing that  all  nations  shall  cease  war.  If  this  Congress  has  done 
nothing  else,  it  has  sent  out  into  the  world  people — and  new 
people,  as  it  were' — to  preach  the  Gospel  of  Peace,  and  surely  it 
must  be  of  some  benefit.  (Applause.) 

To-night,  while  sitting  in  the  other  meeting,  I thought  of 
all  these  flags,  not  one  of  them  stained  or  torn  with  bullets, 
and  I thought  of  what  was  written  over  the  head  of  a beautiful 
picture  I once  saw:  “For  God,  for  King,  for  Country.”  War  is 
neither  for  God,  nor  King,  nor  Country,  and  surely  the  highest 
attributes  of  heavenly  loyalty,  guardianship  and  liberty  of  these 
people  can  be  most  easily  obtained  by  spreading  kindlier  feeling 
all  over  the  world.  That  will  redound  to  the  honor  of  God,  and 
the  honor  of  the  King,  and  the  satisfaction  of  the  Country  far 
more  than  any  war  can  ever  do.  (Applause.) 

I carry  over  from  my  own  country  to  you  the  warmest  and 
kindliest  feelings,  and  my  colleagues  and  I go  back  more  than 
ever  endeared  to  this  great  nation,  for  during  our  whole  visit  we 
have  found  the  warm  hand  of  friendship,  the  big  heart,  the 
hospitable  reception.  Permit  me  to  thank  you  kindly  for  the 
courtesy  with  which  we  have  been  treated.  We  must  indeed 
carry  back  into  our  countries  more  good-will  than  ever,  and  bind 
firmer  together  nation  with  nation,  which  will  glorify  God  and 
bring  Peace  and  happiness  on  earth  and  good-will  toward  all 
men.  (Applause.) 

Mr.  Low  : 

Sir  Robert  Cranston’s  reference  to  the  flags  which  he  saw 
in  the  other  building  reminds  me  of  the  beautiful  line  with  which 
Whittier  commenced  his  centennial  ode  at  the  Philadelphia 
Exposition  in  1876.  He  began  in  this  way: 

“O,  thou  who  hast  in  concord  furled, 

The  war-flags  of  a gathered  world.” 

It  was  under  the  inspiration  of  that  thought,  I am  sure,  that 
these  flags,  unstained  with  blood,  were  hung  about  the  meeting 
halls  of  this  Congress. 

I have  just  received  word  from  Mr.  Carnegie  thanking  this 
company  for  the  invitation  to  be  here,  but  saying  that  his  duty 
at  the  other  dinner  makes  it  impossible. 


422 

I shall  now  introduce  to  you,  as  the  last  speaker  of  the 
evening,  a man  who  has  the  gift  of  clear  statement  beyond 
almost  any  man  in  the  United  States.  I have  pleasure  in  pre- 
senting Dr.  Lyman  Abbott. 

Dr.  Lyman  Abbott: 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  I believe  that 
aerial  navigators  find  their  most  difficult  and  dangerous  moments 
when  they  are  descending  to  the  ground,  to  give  those  that  have 
taken  the  trip  with  them  safe  exit.  It  must  be,  I think,  because 
it  is  believed  that  I can  bring  you  to  the  ground  in  safety  from 
the  flights  of  eloquence  which  you  have  enjoyed  that  I am  asked 
to  make  the  closing  speech  to-night.  I take  for  my  text  the 
question  which  our  President  gave  us  in  the  very  opening.  It 
is  this : “Is  this  picture  of  the  parliament  of  the  world,  a dream  of 
dreamers  or  a vision  of  prophets?”  I believe  it  is  a vision  of 
the  prophets  and  that  we  are  nearer  the  consummation  of  that 
vision  than  most  of  us  think.  It  is  simply  to  state  the  reasons 
for  that  belief,  as  well  as  I can  in  ten  minutes,  that  I have  con- 
sented to  occupy  this  platform. 

The  primal  cell  from  which  all  social  organism  comes  is 
the  family.  It  is  an  industrial  organization,  and  is  based  upon 
co-operation,  and  not  upon  greed  or  competition.  Difficulties 
arise  in  these  families,  but  they  are  not  settled  in  respectable 
families  by  war, — not  even  by  arbitration, — but  by  conciliation. 
In  this  family  there  is  a public  opinion  which  finds  its  expression 
in  family  conferences,  and  its  chief  executive  in  the  father  who 
is  the  head  of  it.  In  time  these  families  are  united  in  tribes,  and 
the  same  triple  bond  of  industry,  of  justice  and  of  public  opinion 
holds  the  family  together  in  a tribe,  but  does  not  operate  out- 
side of  the  tribe.  Then  several  tribes  come  in  time  to  be  com- 
bined in  a province  or  principality,  and  within  the  province  or 
principality,  as  within  the  tribe,  the  same  triple  bond  operates, 
but  not  outside  of  it.  By  and  by  the  provinces  or  principalities 
come  to  be  combined  in  a nation.  Perhaps  the  most  striking 
illustration  of  that  in  history  is  our  own  thirteen  colonies  united 
in  one  federal  republic,  bound  together  by  this  triple  cord — 
commerce,  without  any  hindrance  by  the  States,  law  expressed  by 
the  Supreme  Court  over  all  the  States,  and  public  opinion  find- 
ing its  organic  expression  in  the  Congress  of  the  States.  Families 


423 

have  been  brought  together  in  the  tribe,  and  the  tribes  in  the 
province,  and  the  province  in  the  nation,  and  why  not  nations  in  a 
world?  For  what  is  our  history,  has  been  the  history  of  every 
other  nation,  in  form  different,  but  in  spirit  essentially  the  same. 
The  Anglo-Saxon  kingdoms  have  been  united  in  Great  Britain, 
the  warring  provinces  of  France  in  the  kingdom  of  France,  the 
petty  provinces  of  Germany  in  the  great  empire  of  Germany, 
the  hostile  provinces  of  Italy  in  a free  and  united  Italy.  Why 
should  this  process  stop?  Why  not  carry  it  on?  We  are  met  in 
this  Congress  not  simply  to  find  some  way  to  ameliorate  the 
horrors  of  war,  not  simply  to  provide  new  regulations  of  war, 
not  to  lighten  the  war  taxes,  not  to  lessen  the  number  of  wars, 
not  to  devise  some  method  by  which  sporadic  and  exceptional 
cases  of  difficulty  between  nations  may  be  submitted  to  peaceful 
arbitration.  We  are  engaged  in  this  Congress — and  in  a little 
while  some  of  our  fellow-citizens  will  be  engaged  in  that  larger 
Conference  at  The  Hague — in  carrying  on  this  gradual  process 
of  organization  to  its  legitimate,  necessary  and  logical  con- 
clusion. 

What  does  this  mean?  It  means  a commerce  that  will  be  a 
bond  of  union,  not  a method  of  separation ; a commerce  that  will 
not  be  war;  a commerce  that  will  not  lead  to  bloody  wars;  a 
commerce  whose  watchword  will  be  co-operation,  not  competi- 
tion, or  co-operation  in  service  and  competition  only  in  ambition 
to  render  the  largest  service ; a commerce  in  which  every  nation 
will  recognize  what  to-day  every  merchant  recognizes,  that  a 
good  bargain  is  beneficial  to  both  parties  to  it;  a commerce  in 
which  we  shall  hear  a great  deal  less  than  we  hear  now  about 
the  balance  of  trade  being  in  favor  of  one  nation  and  against 
another  nation;  a commerce  which  will  eventually  take  down  the 
barriers  between  the  different  nations  of  the  world,  as  it  has 
taken  down  the  barriers  between  different  principalities  and 
different  kingdoms  of  the  nation,  and  will  make  of  the  nations 
of  the  world  one  great  free  trading  combination.  It  means  law 
for  the  settling  of  the  difficulties  that  will  arise  in  the  family  of 
nations.  It  means  a Supreme  Court  of  the  nations  whose  writ 
will  run  through  the  world,  as  the  writ  of  the  King’s  Bench 
runs  through  all  Great  Britain,  as  the  writ  of  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States  runs  through  the  United  States;  it  means 
the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy  of  that  ancient  Hebrew  prophet 


424 

who  did  not  merely  see  the  time  when  men  would  beat  their 
swords  into  ploughshares  and  their  spears  into  pruning-hooks, 
but  who  saw  the  time  when  law  should  grow  out  of  Zion,  when 
the  voice  of  God,  speaking  through  humanity,  should  have  all  the 
force  in  it  that  would  be  necessary,  because  there  would  be  a 
universal  consciousness  in  man  that  would  answer  to  it — there- 
fore the  plough  would  take  the  place  of  the  sword  in  the  world. 
It  means  an  organized  public  opinion.  It  means  the  coming  of 
the  time  when  America  will  regard  the  contempt  with  which  the 
civilized  world  looks  upon  its  lynchings ; when  Russia  will 
regard  the  horror  with  which  the  civilized  world  looks  upon 
assassination,  whether  practised  by  bureaucracy  or  autocracy; 
when  Turkey  will  hear  and  feel  the  heartbeat  of  humanity;  when 
the  public  opinion  of  every  nation  will  be  felt  in  every  other 
nation;  and  when  that  public  opinion  will  find  its  expression  in 
a permanent  Hague  Conference  speaking  for  the  world,  as  the 
Parliament  speaks  for  England,  as  the  Chamber  of  Deputies 
speaks  for  France,  and  as  the  Congress  of  the  United  States 
speaks  for  America. 

We  are  perhaps  nearer  this  consummation  than  even  the 
prophetic  souls  of  our  time  imagine.  Events  move  swiftly;  and 
many  concurrent  events  have,  during  the  last  century  and  a 
half,  led  onward  toward  this  world  federation.  Electricity  has 
brought  all  civilized  peoples  within  speaking  distance  of  one 
another;  steam  has  made  easy  the  material  interchange  of  the 
products  of  their  industry.  On  this  side  of  the  Atlantic  thirteen 
feeble  colonies  have  grown  into  a Republic  which  embraces  half 
a continent,  and  a Pan-American  Union  is  bringing  the  Republics 
of  both  continents  into  closer  relations.  Across  the  sea  petty 
German  principalities  have  been  formed  into  a German  Empire, 
and  hostile  Italian  provinces  into  a Kingdom  of  Italy.  Autocracy 
has  been  supplanted  in  all  western  Europe  by  popular  represen- 
tative governments.  Japan  has  thrown  off  feudalism  and  adopted 
free  institutions,  and  a hitherto  amorphous  China  has  begun  to 
grow  into  a vertebrate  nation.  International  law  has  passed 
from  a vague  aspiration  to  a custom  possessing  a real,  though 
undefined  authority.  A Postal  Union,  an  Agricultural  Union,  an 
Interparliamentary  Union,  have  all  been  organized  for  conference 
of  the  nations  on  their  common  interests.  International  arbitra- 
tion has  been  substituted  for  war  in  an  increasing  number  of 


425 

cases,  and  cases  of  increasing  importance.  An  International 
Tribunal  has  been  formed,  with  the  approval  of  all  the  civilized 
nations,  to  which  they  may  if  they  will  submit  the  justice  of 
their  respective  claims  whenever  difficulties  arise  between  them. 
A Conference  of  the  Nations  is  this  summer  to  be  held  to 
consider,  among  other  questions,  this:  How  can  this  Tribunal  be 
made  efficient,  not  merely,  not  even  mainly,  to  prevent  war,  but 
to  promote  and  to  secure  justice  among  the  nations  of  the  earth? 
And  finally,  religious  faith  is  growing  into  unity,  not  of  creed, 
not  of  ritual,  but  of  service  and  of  sacrifice,  a religious  creed 
making  the  people  who  a century  and  a half  ago  were  fighting 
one  another,  and  were  persecuting  one  another,  unite  in  such  a 
Congress  as  this, — Jew,  Roman  Catholic,  Protestant,  Believer 
and  Agnostic,  in  a common  effort  to  bring  Peace  on  earth  and 
good-will  to  mankind.  That  is  what  a century  and  a half  has 
accomplished ! 

We  are  not  here  to  cry  “Peace,  Peace/’  when  there  is  no 
Peace.  We  are  not  here  to  amuse  ourselves  with  an  ideal  vision 
that  has  no  reality.  We  are  here  to  push  forward  to  its  splendid 
consummation  that  long  process  of  human  history  which  has 
united  families  into  tribes,  and  tribes  into  provinces,  and 
provinces  into  nations,  and  our  children  will  live  to  see  the 
time, — my  grandchildren,  your  children, — when  the  nations  of 
the  earth  will  be  bound  together  by  this  triple  cord — an  unre- 
stricted commerce,  international  law,  and  organized  public 
opinion:  a commerce  the  inspiration  of  which  will  be  mutual 
service,  the  object  of  which  will  be  the  common  welfare;  inter- 
national law  interpreted  by  an  international  tribunal  which  will 
substitute  in  all,  differences  between  nations  the  appeal  to 
conscience  for  the  appeal  to  force;  organized  public  opinion 
expressing  itself  through  a parliament  or  congress  of  the 
nations  which  will  speak  for  the  thought  and  the  will  of  the 
civilized  peoples  of  the  globe.  If  we  read  aright  the  history  of 
the  past  and  the  signs  of  the  present,  we  are  nearing  the  consum- 
mation of  history  in  the  organization  of  a hitherto  unorganized 
world.  (Applause.) 

Mr.  Low: 

Unless  this  company  wants  to  begin  all  over  again,  this 
meeting  is  now  adjourned. 


426 


OTHER  MEETINGS 
Religious  and  Ethical  Societies 

Meeting  of  Religious  and  Ethical  Societies  in  the  Broadway 
Tabernacle  Church,  Sunday  afternoon,  at  3 130,  preliminary  to1  the 
opening  of  the  Congress,  Rev.  Frederick  Lynch  presiding. 

This  was  a remarkable  gathering.  The  great  church  was 
packed  to  the  doors.  The  Chairman’s  address  dealt  with  the 
growth  of  the  brotherhood  ideal  and  its  hopeful  augury  for  the 
new  spirit  of  internationalism  rapidly  spreading  over  the  world. 
He  said  that  it  was  not  only  because  certain  things  needed  to  be 
done  that  this  great  Congress  had  been  called,  but  also  because 
the  leaders  of  the  world’s  progress  believed  that  the  time  had 
come  when  they  could  be  done.  The  Congress  hoped  to  put  in 
motion  new  movements  that  would  soon  grow  into  action  to 
secure  the  peace  of  the  world.  Toward  the  accomplishment  of 
this  nothing  can  wield  a stronger  influence  than  the  church. 

Dr.  Newell  Dwight  Hillis  was  the  next  speaker  and  spoke 
on  the  Moral  Damage  of  War.  He  was  followed  by  Rabbi 
Joseph  Silverman,  D.D.,  who  said  the  ages  had  been  sleeping 
morally — it  was  time  now  to  awake  and  be  such  men  as  the 
prophets  foretold  should  people  the  earth. 

The  last  speaker  was  W.  T.  Stead,  of  London,  editor  of 
the  Review  of  Reviews.  Mr.  Stead  told  the  story  of  his  pil- 
grimage to  the  courts  of  Europe — a wonderful  story.  He  spoke  of 
the  signs  of  promise  in  Europe,  of  the  vague  spirit  slowly 
assuming  shape,  of  the  growth  of  international  conscience,  of 
the  new  internationalism,  of  the  shame  that  the  church  was  not 
more  outspoken — not  leading,  as  she  should,  in  this  great  move- 
ment. 


Student  Meetings 

A conference  of  student  delegates  representing  a large  num- 
ber of  colleges  and  universities  was  held  on  Tuesday  morning, 
April  16,  at  10:30,  in  Earl  Hall,  Columbia  University,  under  the 
auspices  of  the  Columbia  University  Arbitration  Society  (a 
student  organization). 


427 

Dean  George  W.  Kirchwey,  of  the  School  of  Law,  presided 
at  this  conference,  which  was  attended  by  about  200  delegates, 
and  addresses  were  also  made  by  Professor  John  Bassett  Moore 
and  Dr.  Ernst  Richard  of  Columbia  University,  by  Professor 
Clark  of  the  College  of  the  City  of  New  York,  President  Henry 
S.  Drinker  of  Lehigh  University  and  by  several  student  delegates. 

After  full  discussion  it  was  decided  that  an  Intercollegiate 
Arbitration  Society  be  organized  and  the  following  resolution 
was  unanimously  adopted: 

Resolved , That  it  is  the  sense  of  this  meeting  that  a com- 
mittee, composed  of  R.  C.  Masterton,  Columbia  (chairman)  ; 
C.  DeW.  Pugsley,  Harvard;  J.  B.  Carlock,  Lehigh;  R.  S.  Side- 
botham,  Princeton ; E.  S.  Whitin,  Columbia ; H.  P.  Barss,  Uni- 
versity of  Rochester;  E.  J.  Klein,  Stevens  Institute;  H.  R. 
Sayre,  Williams ; J.  B.  Farrell,  College  of  the  City  of  New  York, 
be  appointed,  with  power  to  add  to  its  number,  for  the  purpose 
of  forming  an  intercollegiate  organization  to  promote  the  study 
and  discussion  of  international  affairs,  with  a view  to  the  dis- 
semination of  correct  information,  the  removal  of  misunder- 
standings and  the  amicable  settlement  of  international  disputes 
on  the  basis  of  law  and  justice. 

At  the  close  of  the  conference  luncheon  was  served  to  the 
delegates  at  the  University  Commons. 

At  2:30  P.  M.  the  Honorable  William  Jennings  Bryan 
delivered  an  address  to  the  visiting  delegates  and  the  students  of 
Columbia  University  (including  those  of  the  Horace  Mann 
School)  in  the  Auditorium  of  the  Horace  Mann  School. 


Receptions 

Monday  noon,  April  15th,  from  1 to  2.30,  at  the  City  Club. 

Tuesday  noon,  April  16th,  from  1 to  2.30,  at  Barnard  Club. 

Tuesday  noon,  April  16th,  at  Barnard  College,  the  Dean  and 
Students  of  Barnard  received  the  delegates  from  women’s  col- 
leges, after  which  an  address  on  the  Peace  Movement  was  de- 
livered to  the  delegates  and  students  in  the  Barnard  Theatre  by 
Mrs.  Henrotin  of  Chicago.  At  the  conclusion  of  this  meeting 
the  visiting  delegates  were  entertained  at  luncheon  at  Barnard 
College. 


428 

Tuesday  afternoon,  April  16th,  from  3 to  4 at  Sherry’s. 
The  Patriotic  Committee  received  the  delegates  from  patriotic 
societies. 

Tuesday  afternoon,  April  16th,  from  4 to  6 in  Earl  Hall, 
President  Nicholas  Murray  Butler  of  Columbia  University,  and 
Mrs.  Butler  received  the  foreign  visitors,  the  University  and 
other  delegates. 

Wednesday  noon,  April  17th,  from  1 to  2.30,  at  the  Metro- 
politan Club.  A luncheon  was  given  to  all  the  editors,  foreign 
guests,  principal  speakers  and  officers  of  the  Congress. 


THE  LIBRARY 
OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


From  Stereograph,  Copyright  1907, 
by  Underwood  & Underwood,  New  York. 


Hon.  Charles  J.  Bonaparte 
Hon.  James  Wilson 


Hon  George  Von  L.  Meyer 
Hon.  James  R.  Garfield 


Hon.  George  B.  Cortelyou 
Hon.  William  H.  Taft 
Hon.  Victor  L.  Metcalf 


429 

HISTORICAL  NOTE 

Edwin  D.  Mead 

The  first  Peace  Society  of  America,  or  in  the  world,  was 
founded  in  New  York  by  David  Low  Dodge  and  his  associates, 
in  August,  1815.  The  Massachusetts  Peace  Society,  which  owed 
its  initiative  to  Noah  Worcester,  was  organized  in  Dr.  Channing’s 
study  in  Boston,  in  Christmas  week  of  the  same  year.  The  London 
Society  was  organized  the  next  year ; and  from  that  time  on  Peace 
Societies  multiplied.  But  almost  a generation  passed  before  the 
inauguration  of  Peace  Congresses.  The  first  International  Peace 
Congress  was  held  in  London  in  1843.  It  was  the  thought  of  the 
English  philanthropist,  Joseph  Sturge,  the  friend  of  Garrison  and 
Whittier  and  other  American  anti-slavery  leaders,  and  was  first 
broached  by  him  in  1841  to  members  of  the  American  Peace 
Society  in  Boston.  Our  Society  warmly  endorsed  it  and  com- 
mended it  to  the  English  Society,  and  through  the  co-operation 
of  the  two,  the  memorable  London  Congress  was  brought  about. 
It  was  almost  exclusively  a British  and  American  Congress,  294 
of  the  337  delegates  being  from  Great  Britain,  37  from  America, 
and  6 from  the  continent  of  Europe.  Perhaps  the  most  important 
practical  proposition  considered  at  this  first  Congress  was  that  of 
Judge  William  Jay  of  New  York,  President  of  the  American 
Peace  Society  during  the  decade  in  which  the  historic  Peace 
Congresses  in  Europe  in  the  middle  of  the  last  century  occurred, 
that  an  arbitration  clause  should  be  embodied  in  all  future  com- 
mercial treaties  between  the  great  powers.  At  the  four  subse- 
quent Congresses  the  American  representatives  stood  pre- 
eminently for  the  demand  for  a Congress  of  Nations,  which 
should  develop  and  codify  international  law  and  create  an  inter- 
national Tribunal;  and  this  constructive  program,  which  our 
own  day  at  last  is  seeing  realized,  was  popularly  spoken  of  in 
Europe  throughout  the  decade  as  “the  American  way.”  It  was 
an  American,  Elihu  Burritt,  who  was  the  chief  inspiring  and 
shaping  force  for  the  Brussels  Congress  in  1848,  followed  by  the 
great  Congresses  of  Paris,  Frankfort  and  London  in  1849,  I^5° 
and  1851.  At  both  Paris  and  Frankfort  there  were  more 
than  twenty  American  delegates,  at  London  more  than  sixty. 
The  Paris  Congress,  over  which  Victor  Hugo  presided,  and  the 
London  Congress,  held  in  the  year  of  the  first  International 


430 

Exposition  and  having  more  than  a thousand  delegates  from 
England  alone,  were  immense  and  most  impressive  gatherings, 
and  in  them  the  Peace  Movement  in  the  last  century  reached  its 
highest  point.  They  were  followed  by  two  important  British 
Congresses,  at  Manchester  and  Edinburgh;  and  then  came  the 
Crimean  war  and  the  other  great  wars  of  that  period,  and  there 
was  a long  interregnum. 

The  first  of  the  present  series  of  International  Peace  Con- 
gresses was  held  at  Paris  in  1889,  the  year  of  the  Paris  Expo- 
sition. Frederic  Passey  was  its  president,  and  the  number  of 
delegates  in  attendance  was  almost  the  same  as  at  the  first  London 
Congress  in  1843.  The  second  Congress  met  the  next  year  in 
London,  Hon.  David  Dudley  Field  of  New  York  serving  as  its 
president.  The  subsequent  Congresses  have  been  held  at  Rome, 
Berne,  Chicago  (in  1893),  Antwerp,  Buda-Pest,  Hamburg,  Paris, 
Glasgow,  Monaco,  Rouen,  Boston,  Lucerne  and  Milan.  Of  all 
these  International  Congresses  that  in  Boston  in  1904  had  the 
largest  attendance,  its  impressive  feature  being  a series  of  great 
mass-meetings  for  the  people.  One  of  its  results  was  an  Amer- 
ican delegation  of  over  fifty  at  the  Lucerne  Congress  the 
following  year,  a number  five  times  as  great  as  that  which  had 
attended  the  other  Congresses  in  Europe  during  these  eighteen 
years.  It  is  earnestly  hoped  that  an  American  delegation  as  large 
or  larger  will  be  present  at  the  Congress  this  year,  which  is  to 
meet  at  Munich  in  September.  It  is  ten  years  since  the  last  Inter- 
national Congress  was  held  in  Germany, — at  Hamburg,  in  1897; 
and  this  occasion  should  be  embraced  for  a demonstration  of 
American  friendship  and  admiration  for  the  great  German  nation, 
to  which  our  scholars  owe  so  great  a debt  of  gratitude,  and  to 
which  so  many  millions  of  our  people  are  bound  by  the  close  ties 
of  race. 

In  recent  years  the  need  for  regular  National  Peace  Con- 
gresses, in  addition  to  the  International  Congresses,  has  been 
making  itself  everywhere  more  and  more  strongly  felt.  Compara- 
tively few  at  best  of  the  peace-workers  in  any  country  are  able 
to  attend  the  Congresses  in  other  countries.  To  many  the 
hindrances  of  foreign  languages  and  usages  are  serious.  It  is 
important,  moreover,  to  consolidate  and  organize  the  Peace  party 
in  each  country,  and  by  National  Congresses  to  influence  public 
opinion.  France,  which  has  taken  the  lead  in  so  many  of  the 


431 

important  Peace  movements  of  the  last  twenty  years,  was  the 
first  to  act  in  response  to  this  widespread  feeling.  The  first 
French  National  Peace  Congress  was  held  at  Toulouse  in  1902 ; 
and  subsequent  Congresses  have  been  held  at  Nismes,  Lille  and 
Lyons.  England  was  the  second  to  act;  and  the  Congresses  at 
Manchester,  Bristol  and  Birmingham  in  the  last  three  years  have 
been  large  and  influential,  giving  new  life  and  better  direction  to 
the  English  Peace  Movement.  The  agitation  for  similar  action 
in  Germany  is  now  strong;  and  the  inauguration  of  German 
National  Congresses  is  likely  to  result  from  conferences  of  the 
great  number  of  German  peace-workers  who  will  gather  at 
Munich  in  September. 

It  is  at  this  juncture  and  with  this  background  that  the  first 
American  National  Peace  Congress  assembled  in  New  York  in 
April,  1907.  But  the  Congress  had  also  a distinct  American 
background.  The  Mohonk  Arbitration  Conferences,  which  ante- 
date the  English  and  French  Peace  Congresses,  have  in  great 
measure  performed  the  function  of  National  Congresses  for 
America  for  a dozen  years.  The  education  and  inspiration  in 
right  international  thought  which  they  have  given  the  country  in 
the  critical  period  when  that  influence  was  most  imperatively 
needed,  are  incalculable.  America’s  obligation  to  the  consecrated 
and  prophetic  founder  of  the  Mohonk.  Conference  is  profound. 
That  stimulating  nursery  and  school  for  effort  in  the  great  cities 
of  the  country  will  render  ever  larger  service  and  have  ever 
wider  scope  as  the  Peace  Congresses  multiply  with  the  years. 

Above  all  other  preparations  for  the  new  epoch  and  larger 
activities  of  the  Peace  Movement  in  America  marked  by  the 
assembling  of  our  first  National  Peace  Congress,  has  been  the 
steady,  increasing  influence  of  our  great  Prophets  of  Peace,  from 
the  founders  of  the  Republic,  and  from  David  Low  Dodge  and 
Noah  Worcester  to  the  present  hour,  whose  lofty  conceptions  and 
inspired  words  have  leavened  the  public  thought.  In  this  time  of 
larger  life  and  larger  hopes  we  remember  with  gratitude  and 
reverence  the  men  who  laid  the  foundations  of  our  temple  of 
Peace.  E.  D.  M. 


432 


RESOLUTIONS 

STATE  OF  NEW  YORK  IN  ASSEMBLY 

Albany,  N.  Y.,  April  n,  1907. 

By  Mr.  Moreland: 

CONCURRENT  RESOLUTION  of  Senate  and  Assembly 
of  the  State  of  New  York,  in  relation  to  the  Convention  of  the 
National  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress  to  be  held  at  New 
York  City,  April  fourteenth  to  seventeenth,  nineteen  hundred  and 
seven. 

Whereas , The  Convention  of  the  National  Arbitration  and 
Peace  Congress  is  to  be  held  in  the  City  of  New  York,  April 
fourteenth  to  seventeenth,  nineteen  hundred  and  seven,  therefore 
be  it 

Resolved  (if  the  Senate  concur)  — 

1.  That  general  treaties  of  arbitration  should  be  negotiated 
by  the  United  States  with  all  nations,  granting  jurisdiction  to  the 
International  Court  at  The  Hague  over  as  many  classes  of  con- 
troversies as  the  other  contracting  powers  can  be  induced  to 
transfer  from  the  arbitrament  of  war  to  trial  before  a court 
of  justice. 

2.  That  the  United  States  should  declare  in  favor  of  a 
permanent  International  Congress  composed  of  representatives 
from  every  nation,  to  assemble  periodically  and  automatically 
for  the  purpose  of  suggesting  such  changes  in  the  law  of  nations, 
and  in  the  method  of  its  administration,  as  the  current  of  events 
may  make  desirable  and  practicable. 

3.  That  pending  the  construction  and  successful  operation 
of  such  an  assembly  and  also  the  other  machinery  necessary  for 
the  effectual  substitution  of  law  for  war  in  the  international 
domain,  the  United  States  Government  should  adopt  a naval 
program  which  will  enable  the  navy  to  perform  its  duty — guard- 
ing our  exposed  sea  coasts,  distant  possessions,  our  ocean-going 
commerce,  also  our  interests  and  our  citizens  in  foreign  coun- 
tries, and  executing  the  just  foreign  policies  of  the  nation. 

4.  That  the  Governor  be,  and  he  hereby  is,  authorized  and 
instructed  to  appoint  a suitable  number  of  delegates  to  accom- 


433 

pany  him  to  the  National  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress  to  be 
held  at  New  York  City,  April  14-17,  as  representatives  of  this 
body,  and  to  extend  to  the  delegates  from  other  State  Capitals 
such  hospitality  as  will  be  appropriate. 

5.  That  the  Clerk  of  the  Assembly  transmit  copies  of  this 
resolution,  suitably  engrossed,  to  the  Legislatures  of  the  several 
States. 

Agreed  to  by  the  Assembly, 

A.  E.  Baxter, 

Clerk. 

IN  SENATE: 

April  II,  1907.  Concurred  in  without  amendment. 

By  order  of  the  Senate. 

Lafayette  B.  Gleason, 

Clerk. 


The  delegates  to  the  Congress  appointed  by  Governor 
Hughes  were: 


SENATORS. 

George  B.  Agnew, 
Francis  M.  Carpenter, 
John  P.  Cohalan, 

Otto  Foelker, 

Charles  H.  Fuller, 
Alfred  R.  Page, 
William  Sohmer. 


ASSEMBLYMEN. 

Owen  W.  Bohan, 

W.  I.  Lee, 

C.  F.  Murphy, 

Ezra  P.  Prentice, 
Leopold  Prince, 

Beverly  R.  Robinson, 
Fred  D.  Wells. 

J.  Mayhew  Wainwright, 


NEW  YORK  CHAMBER  OF  COMMERCE 

The  following  resolutions  were  passed  by  the  New  York 
Chamber  of  Commerce : 

Whereas,  A Congress  for  the  promotion  of  a system  of  Law- 
and  Order  as  a substitute  for  war  between  nations  is  to  be  con- 
vened in  this  city  on  April  14,  1907,  at  the  instance  of  men  prom- 
inent in  the  cause  of  International  Peace;  and 

Whereas,  The  Chamber  of  Commerce  of  the  State  of  New 
York  is  deeply  interested  in  movements  tending  to  preserve 
friendly  relations  between  this  country  and  other  nations  and  in* 
the  promotion  of  commerce ; therefore,  be  it 


434 

Resolved,  That  the  Executive  Committee  be  requested  to  take 
such  action  in  regard  to  the  Congress  as  in  its  judgment  will  be 
well  and  appropriate  and  in  accordance  with  the  principles  of  the 
Chamber. 

The  following  delegates  were  appointed : 

Levi  P.  Morton,  R.  Fulton  Cutting,  A.  Barton  Hepburn, 
Cornelius  N.  Bliss,  Marcus  M.  Marks. 

BUSINESS  MEN’S  ASSOCIATION,  PROVIDENCE 

We  are,  individually  and  as  a body,  entirely  in  sympathy 
with  the  causes  and  purposes  for  which  the  Congress  stands, 
and,  as  Secretary  of  the  Association,  I was  instructed  to  com- 
municate this  expression  to  you  as  our  unanimous  sentiment. 
The  importance  of  this  Congress  and  its  value  to  the  entire  world 
are  inestimable.  Each  association  of  business  men  should  be, 
and  no  doubt  is,  ready  to  do  all  in  its  power  toward  the  ideal 
of  commercial,  industrial,  and  universal  peace. 

James  B.  Littlefield, 

Secretary. 

MERCHANTS'  EXCHANGE  OF  ST.  LOUIS 

The  Merchants’  Exchange  of  St.  Louis,  through  its  Board  of 
Directors,  has  repeatedly  given  expression  in  favor  of  Interna- 
tional Arbitration  for  the  settlement  of  disputes  between  nations, 
and,  therefore,  is  in  hearty  accord  with  the  movement  for  a 
National  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress  to  be  held  in  New  York 
City,  April  14th  to  17th. 

George  H.  Morgan, 

Secretary. 

BOARD  OF  TRADE  OF  THE  CITY  OF  CHICAGO 

The  Chicago  Board  of  Trade  is  in  hearty  sympathy  with  the 
views  and  aims  of  the  International  Arbitration  and  Peace  Con- 
gress, and  recognizes  the  vital  relation  that  exists  between  inter- 
national commerce  and  universal  peace.  Commerce  is  promoted 
more  than  anything  else  by  peaceful  and  friendly  relations.  Our 
foreign  commerce  can  be  promoted  in  no  higher  or  more  per- 
manent sense  than  by  preserving  and  cultivating  peaceful  rela- 
tions with  the  nations  of  the  world.  On  the  other  hand,  there  is 


435 

no  more  potent  instrumentality  for  maintaining  international 
peace  than  a growing  and  mutually  profitable  commerce  between 
the  nations  of  the  world. 

Commerce  is  the  handmaid  of  peace  and  good-will,  since  it 
creates  and  maintains  an  order  of  citizens  bound  by  their  own 
interests  to  promote  the  public  tranquillity. 

George  F.  Stone, 

Secretary. 

THE  BUSINESS  MEN’S  CLUB  OF  CINCINNATI 

Whereas , There  will  be  held  in  the  City  of  New  York  on 
April  14th  to  17th,  a National  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress, 
and 

Whereas , The  deliberation  of  such  a representative  assem- 
blage cannot  help  but  add  material  impetus  to  the  establishment 
of  universal  peace,  which  would  mark  an  era  in  the  uplifting  of 
all  mankind ; therefore  be  it 

Resolved,  That  the  Business  Men’s  Club  of  Cincinnati,  Ohio, 
hereby  heartily  endorses  the  aims  and  purposes  of  said  Congress ; 
and  be  it  further 

Resolved , That  one  or  more  delegates  be  appointed  to  attend 
said  Congress  on  behalf  of  the  Club ; and  be  it  further 

Resolved,  That  a copy  of  these  resolutions  be  forwarded  to 
the  President  of  said  Congress. 


ITALIAN  CHAMBER  OF  COMMERCE  OF  NEW  YORK  CITY 

As  delegates  appointed  by  this  Italian  Chamber  of  Com- 
merce to  the  National  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress,  we  have 
the  honor  to  convey  the  cordial  greetings  of  the  said  institution 
and  its  full  acknowledgment  of  the  incommensurable  services 
which  the  Congress  is  about  to  render  to  humanity. 

As  representatives  of  a commercial  body,  considering  the 
question  from  the  commercial  point  of  view  solely,  we  beg  to 
state : 

Whereas,  War  means  loss  of  lives  and  consequently  loss  of 
labor,  be  it  intellectual  or  material,  depriving  agriculture  and 
industry  of  vital  factors  necessary  to  the  development  of  land 
and  factories; 


436 

Whereas,  War,  and  preparations  for  it,  involve  nations 
in  enormous  expenses,  whilst  the  amount  thus  squandered  to 
kill  and  be  killed  could  be  used  to  foster  vitality  and  wealth  of 
the  people,  and 

Whereas , From  the  prosperity  of  a country  proceeds  the 
progress  of  its  commerce  and  industries ; be  it 

Resolved , That  the  Italian  Chamber  of  Commerce  gives  its 
full  and  hearty  moral  support  to  the  National  Arbitration  and 
Peace  Congress  in  its  endeavors  to  accomplish  the  most  needed 
and  most  sacred  work  by  which  the  whole  world  will  benefit, 
and  expresses  its  hopefulness  that  the  nations  may  agree  on  an 
International  Arbitration  Court,  settling  any  controversy  without 
bloodshed,  loss  in  money,  destruction  of  property,  burdens  of 
pensions,  interest  and  all  the  other  horrors  of  war  and  costly 
consequences  of  the  maintenance  of  “Armed  Peace.” 

Joseph  N.  Fearnomini,  Antonio  Zucca, 

Egisto  Mariani,  Achille  Starace, 

Arthur  J.  Stephani. 

THE  MERCHANTS’  ASSOCIATION  OF  NEW  YORK 

Whereas,  An  International  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress 
is  to  be  held  in  this  city  on  April  14-17,  1907. 

Resolved,  That  the  Merchants’  Association  of  New  York, 
through  its  Board  of  Directors,  cordially  expresses  its  hearty 
sympathy  with  and  intention  to  further  the  present  tendency  to 
promote  permanent  peace  and  good-will  between  the  nations  of 
the  world,  not  only  in  the  cause  of  humanity,  but  as  a necessary 
means  for  protecting  and  advancing  the  widespread  and  con- 
stantly expanding  commercial  interests  of  the  United  States. 

The  following  delegates  were  appointed: 

J.  Crawford  McCreery,  W.  H.  McCord, 

W.  A.  Marble,  George  L.  Duval, 

Daniel  P.  Morse. 

BAND  OF  MERCY 

At  a Peace  Meeting  of  some  thousand  Band  of  Mercy  mem- 
bers and  friends,  held  in  Tremont  Temple,  Boston,  to-day,  the 
following  resolution  was  unanimously  passed: 

Whereas,  A colossal  statue  of  Christ,  called  the  Christ  of  the 
Andes,  has  been  erected  on  the  boundary  line  of  Chili  and  Argen- 


437 

tine  Republic  as  a monument  of  perpetual  Peace  between  the  two 
nations. 

Resolved,  That  we  respectfully  ask  the  Peace  Congress  now 
in  session  in  New  York  City  to  urge  upon  the  Peace  Conference 
soon  to  be  held  at  The  Hague,  that  similar  statues  of  Christ  be 
erected  on  the  boundary  lines  of  other  adjacent  Christian  nations, 
and  that  no  war  shall  hereafter  be  declared  between  such  nations 
until  the  statue  of  Christ,  standing  on  their  boundary  line,  shall 
be  taken  down  and  destroyed. 

George  T.  Angell, 

President  American  Humane  Society. 


Some  of  the  Letters  and  Telegrams  Received,  Showing 
the  World- wide  Interest  In  the  Congress 

THE  KING  OF  ITALY 

Catania,  Royal  Yacht  Trinacria,  April  13,  1907. 

I thank  you  cordially  for  your  kind  invitation.  I anticipate 
that  the  National  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress — promoted  by 
renowned  benefactors  of  mankind — will  be  an  important  step 
towards  the  accomplishment  of  their  noble  ideals. 

Vittorio  Emanuel. 

THE  KING  OF  NORWAY 

Christiana,  April  n,  1907. 

I beg  you  to  bring  my  best  greetings  to  the  National  Arbi- 
tration and  Peace  Congress,  whose  work  I hope  may  promote  the 
great  purpose  of  advocating  the  peaceful  settlement  of  interna- 
tional misunderstandings,  a purpose  in  which  the  Norwegian 
people  take  such  a lively  interest.  Haakon  VII. 

THE  PRESIDENT  OF  SWITZERLAND 

Berne,  April  4,  1907. 

Your  favor  of  March  nth  was  duly  received,  and  I appre- 
ciate deeply  the  honor  you  extend  to  me  in  the  name  of  the  organ- 
izers of  the  National  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress,  which  will 
meet  this  month  in  New  York.  To  my  regret  I will  not  be  able 
to  accomplish  what  you  ask  of  me  in  your  letter,  but  I am  very 
happy  of  this  opportunity  to  assure  you  of  the  interest  I have 
in  the  work  in  which  the  Congress  is  engaged  and  to  express  to 


438 

you  my  most  sincere  wishes  on  the  success  of  your  work.  Please 
accept  the  assurance  of  my  deepest  sympathy. 

Edouard  Muller. 

THE  PRESIDENT  OF  MEXICO 

Mexico  City,  Mexico,  March  29,  1907. 

I would  accept  with  pleasure  the  courteous  and  honorable 
invitation  which  you  have  been  pleased  to  send  me  under  date 
of  27th  of  February  last  to  assist  at  the  Congress  of  Arbitration 
and  Peace,  which  is  to  convene  in  your  city,  from  the  14th  to 
the  17th  of  April  next,  and  to  speak  at  the  public  banquet  which 
is  to  terminate  so  interesting  and  timely  an  assembly  on  the  ap- 
proach of  the  Peace  Conference.  However,  I cannot  obtain  per- 
mission from  the  Congress  of  the  Nation. 

During  its  next  sessions  devoted  to  fixing  the  budget  and 
other  grave  questions,  I shall  be  prevented  from  having  the  honor 
of  being  associated  with  the  very  distinguished  persons  to  whom 
you  refer,  who  are  going  to  promote  the  noble  and  most  impor- 
tant cause  of  peace  throughout  the  civilized  world. 

Porfirio  Diaz. 

THE  PRESIDENT  OF  BRAZIL 

Rio  Janeiro,  April  16,  1907. 

I take  pleasure  in  expressing  my  deepest  sympathy  with  the 
work  that  the  National  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress,  at 
present  assembled  in  New*  York,  is  doing  in  favor  of  the  interests 
of  international  good-will.  Alphonso  Penna. 

THE  PRESIDENT  OF  CHILI 

Santiago,  April  24,  1907. 

Your  letter  of  the  nth  of  last  month  has  just  reached  me 
to-day  when  the  meetings  of  the  National  Arbitration  and  Peace 
Congress  are  over.  This  delay  has  deprived  me  of  the  pleasure 
I would  have  experienced  in  expressing  directly  to  the  Congress 
the  fellow  feeling  and  interest  which  the  people  of  this  Republic 
entertain  with  regard  to  all  ideas  tending  to  insure  peace  among 
nations  and  to  establish  therein  progress  and  cordial  relations. 

I congratulate  Mr.  Carnegie  and  the  other  promoters  of  the 
Congress  on  their  patriotic  work  and  trust  that  they  may  perse- 
vere in  their  commendable  efforts.  Pedro  Montt. 


439 

PRESIDENT,  BRITISH  INTERPARLIAMENTARY  GROUP 

London,  March  30,  1907. 

The  great  Congress  which  is  to  be  held  under  Mr. 
Carnegie’s  presidency  should  mark  a substantial  advance  in  public 
opinion.  The  friends  of  peace  are  looking  much  to  America  to 
give  force  and  driving  power  to  the  movement. 

Our  Interparliamentary  Conference  last  year  in  London  was 
signalized  by  a remarkable  speech  of  the  British  Premier,  Sir 
Henry  Campbell-Bannerman,  in  which  he  enunciated  his  un- 
wavering devotion  to  our  cause,  and  he  has  since  shown  in 
official  action  that  he,  at  least,  does  not  despair  of  some  action 
being  taken  at  the  approaching  Hague  Conference  in  the  direc- 
tion of  the  limitation  of  bloated  armaments,  at  present  the  scourge 
and  the  disgrace  of  civilized  and  Christian  nations. 

Weardale. 

HUNGARIAN  MINISTER  OF  EDUCATION 

Budapesth,  Hungary,  March  22,  1907. 

The  duties  of  my  official  position  make  it  impossible  for  me 
to  attend  your  meeting,  but  there  is  nothing  in  those  duties  to 
debar  me  from  expressing  my  deep  devotion  to  the  noble  cause 
and  to  the  principle  which  the  American  National  Peace  Congress 
is  intended  to  assert,  not  with  unaccustomed  splendor  only,  but, 
as  we  may  and  do  hope,  with  irresistible  efficacy.  I should 
have  been  proud  indeed  to  take  part  in  its  proceedings ; to  make 
my  voice  heard  among  the  voices  of  so  many  illustrious  Amer- 
icans ; to  deliver  a message  of  sympathy  from  eastern  Europe  to 
the  American  people  arrayed  under  the  banner  of  international 
fraternity;  to  bring  an  echo  from  the  old  world  to  the  voice  of 
the  new  one,  to  make  it  swell  into  an  anthem  of  peace  sung  by 
the  animated  universe  : nay,  not  an  anthem  but  the  proclamation 
of  a set  purpose,  of  an  unconquerable  will,  that  there  be  no 
more  strife  and  bloodshed  between  the  sons  of  God,  but  justice 
and  brotherly  love ; the  reign  on  earth  of  their  heavenly  Father. 

This  message,  which  I am  prevented  from  delivering  in 
person,  let  me  send  you  in  the  shape  of  a few  written  words. 
Great  as  you  appear  before  the  world  on  account  of  your 
undaunted  energy  in  every  branch  of  human  activity,  of  your 
unflinching  devotion  to  liberty  and  democracy  and  your  successful 
application  of  true  principle  to  the  building  up  of  a powerful 


440 

political  and  social  organization ; great  as  the  glory  is  which 
America  derives  from  these  proud  achievements,  she  will  rise 
higher  still  through  the  efficacious  advocacy  of  international 
reform,  which  means  after  all  but  the  extension,  in  some  way, 
to  the  relation  between  nations  of  those  principles  on  which  the 
American  commonwealth  is  founded.  It  is  a path  of  pure  glory 
which  you  are  entering  now,  of  a glory  not  defiled  by  the  curse 
of  its  victims,  but  entranced  and  sanctified  by  the  blessings  of 
millions,  to  whom  an  advance  in  goodness  and  in  happiness 
grows  out  of  its  warm  light. 

On  that  path  we  mean  to  follow  you ; may  our  common 
progress  in  it  bear  testimony  to  the  energy  of  American 
leadership.  Albert  Appqnyi. 

INTERNATIONAL  PEACE  SOCIETY 

Milan,  Italy,  April  14,  1907. 

The  International  Peace  Society,  Lombard  Union,  Milan, 
takes  a great  interest  in  the  important  event  of  the  National  Con- 
gress and  sends  to  all  the  members  of  the  Congress  and  the 
friends  of  Peace  in  great  and  free  America,  greetings  and  best 
wishes  for  complete  success  in  the  near  future. 

The  glorious  Federation  of  the  United  States  is  a symbol 
and  historical  example  of  brotherhood  and  progress  to  all  nations. 
To-day  it  fulfils  the  high  mission  of  civilization,  and  with  all 
its  force  and  with  the  enthusiasm  of  its  brave  race  will  keep  on 
in  the  sacred  work  of  maintaining  solidarity  and  Universal  Peace. 

Over  your  important  labors,  oh,  American  brethren,  presides 
in  these  days  the  immortal  genius  of  George  Washington,  and 
as  the  anniversary  of  his  birth  is  celebrated  throughout  the  whole 
world  by  all  Peace  Societies  as  a symbol  of  concord  and  unity 
among  all  people,  it  is  quite  just  to  hope  that  the  persevering  and 
indefatigable  work  of  the  American  nations  co-operating  with 
other  nations  will  bring  to  pass  the  triumph  of  our  sublime  ideal. 

The  United  States,  which  has  had  few  wars,  and  those  only 
for  the  cause  of  liberty  and  justice,  is  working  and  thinking  for 
the  holy  principles  of  right  and  union  among  the  people,  and  by 
means  of  free  confederations  has  attained  true  civil  Peace  with- 
out ruinous  and  murderous  arms.  It  was  the  United  States  that 
promoted  the  first  International  Peace  Movement,  and  there 
the  first  two  great  Peace  Congresses  took  place — the  first  the 


441 

Universal  Peace  Congress  at  Chicago  in  1893,  and  the  second  at 
Boston  in  1904.  It  was  due  to  America  that  the  terrible  war 
between  Japan  and  Russia  was  ended,  for  they  acted  as  mediator 
between  the  two  nations,  thus  realizing  the  hopes  and  desires  of 
the  entire  world. 

For  all  these  reasons  the  United  States  of  America,  more 
than  any  other  nation,  is  sacred  to  the  cause  and  work  of  In- 
ternational Peace.  All  the  sister  nations  of  the  world  look  up  to 
you  as  to  the  lighthouse  of  civilization  and  Peace,  which  shall 
enlighten  and  guide  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  in  the  future. 

With  these  sentiments,  oh,  brethren  of  America,  accept  the 
greeting  and  loyalty  of  the  lovers  of  Peace  in  Italy,  who  are 
present  in  mind  at  the  meetings  of  your  National  Congress,  and 
send  heartiest  appreciation  of  the  benefits  derived  from  your 
humanitarian  labors. 

Please  accept,  Honorable  President,  the  assurance  of  our 
highest  esteem  and  sympathy. 

Moneta,  President. 

Munich,  Germany,  April  15,  1907. 

Good  fortune.  Hope  numerous  American  friends  follow 
invitation  Munich.  Quidde. 

THE  INTERNATIONAL  BUREAU  DE  LA  PAIX 

Berne,  Switzerland,  April  2,  1907. 

On  behalf  of  the  International  Bureau  of  Peace  in  Berne, 
we  wish  to  convey  to  our  colleagues,  convening  for  the  first  Amer- 
ican Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress,  a message  of  sympathy  and 
heartiest  congratulations. 

This  gathering  is  truly  an  important  one,  not  only  because 
of  the  many  representative  men  and  women  who  will  be  present, 
but  also  because  of  its  principal  object  and  leading  thought.  The 
second  Peace  Conference  at  The  Hague  must  be  a great  stride 
onward  in  international  friendship  and  good-will ; it  must  form 
the  basis  of  a new  era  of  material  and  moral  welfare  of  humanity. 

May  the  old  and  new  world  unite  for  this  great  purpose, 
and  may  this  plague  of  mankind,  war,  soon  be  banished  from 
the  earth.  A.  Gob  at. 


442 

THE  MINISTER  OF  THE  NETHERLANDS 

Washington,  D.  C.  .April  n,  1907. 

The  Minister  of  Foreign  Affairs  at  The  Hague  informs 
me  of  a request  made  by  the  National  American  Congress  of 
Arbitration  and  Peace  which  is  to  meet  in  the  City  of  New  York 
from  April  14  to  16,  that  it  may  be  honored  by  a message  of  Her 
Majesty  the  Queen,  my  Gracious  Sovereign. 

I am  instructed  by  my  Government  to  inform  you  that  it 
is  inconsistent  with  the  constitutional  traditions  of  the  Nether- 
lands for  Her  Majesty  the  Queen  to  give  Her  opinion  on  matters 
as  indicated  by  the  above  said  request. 

The  Minister  of  Foreign  Affairs  at  the  same  time  invites 
me  to  assure  the  National  American  Congress  of  Arbitration  and 
Peace  of  the  best  wishes  which  he  forms  for  the  success  of  the 
Congress  to  which  questions  of  the  highest  importance  are  to  be 
submitted. 

In  acquitting  myself  of  these  orders  I take  this  oppor- 
tunity to  offer  you  the  assurance  of  my  high  consideration. 

R.  de  Marees  van  Swinderen. 

THE  NOBEL  COMMITTEE,  NORWEGIAN  PARLIAMENT 

Christiania,  April  15,  1907. 

Nobel  Committee  Norwegian  Parliament  greets  American 
Peace  Congress,  assured  United  States  continue  glorious  tradi- 
tions advocating  Peace  principles.  Loveland,  Chairman. 

I beg  you  to  accept  the  following  greeting  from  Norway: 
May  the  United  States  of  America,  which  a century  ago  began 
to  wave  the  banner  of  peace,  see  it  in  glorious  splendor  become 
the  practice  of  the  whole  world. 

May  the  United  States,  in  which  the  energy,  industry  and 
cleverness  of  the  Old  World  seems  to  be  united,  go  forward, 
leading  in  the  greatest  work  of  this  century — the  work  of  Peace. 

John  Lund,  Vice-President. 

THE  SWEDISH  INTERPARLIAMENTARY  GROUP 

Stockholm,  April  14th,  1907. 

The  Swedish  Interparliamentary  Group  herewith  send  their 
best  and  sincerest  wishes  to  the  Congress  as  well  as  the  expres- 
sion of  their  most  heartfelt  sympathy  with  its  important  labor. 

Baron  Bonde,  Count  Hamilton,  Ernest  Beckman, 
J.  Bromee  Von  Scheele. 


443 

Stockholm,  Sweden,  April  15,  1907. 

Seven  hundred  thousand  International  Good  Templars  send 
greeting  manifesting  their  brotherhood. 

E.  Wavrinsky. 

VICE-PRESIDENT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 

Indianapolis,  Indiana,  April  1,  1907. 

It  is  gratifying  to  see  that  this  great  subject  is  receiving 
more  and  more  thoughtfuf  consideration  from  the  leading  men  of 
this  country.  The  present  generation  can  make  no  better  contri- 
bution to  the  future  than  some  means  whereby  questions  which 
vex  nations  in  their  intercourse  with  each  other  may  be  honor- 
ably determined  without  a resort  to  arms.  Our  civilization  is 
a dismal  failure  if  we  do  not  have  enough  intelligence,  morality 
and  courage  to  compose  disputes  between  nations  in  some  other 
manner  than  by  recourse  to  war.  We  hail  and  proclaim  the 
virtues  and  achievements  of  our  heroes  upon  the  field  and  upon 
the  seas.  We  will  decorate  with  the  evidence  of  our  gratitude 
those  who  shall  win  the  greatest  victory  of  all,  and  that  is  victory 
over  war  itself. 

I wish  you  and  those  who  are  engaged  in  the  promotion  of 
International  Peace  a speedy  realization  of  your  hopes  and  your 
efforts.  Charles  W.  Fairbanks, 

HEADQUARTERS  GRAND  ARMY  OF  THE  REPUBLIC 

Zanesville,  Ohio,  April  1,  1907. 

As  a soldier,  I welcome  every  effort  to  promote  Peace,  and 
I trust  that  never  again  shall  our  young  men  be  called  to  stand 
on  the  firing  line  to  oppose  any  foe,  foreign  or  domestic. 

R.  B.  Brown, 

Commander-in-Chief. 

THE  SUPREME  COURT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 

Washington,  April  16,  1907. 

I regret  that  my  official  duties  prevent  my  attendance  at  the 
Peace  Congress  and  your  Wednesday  evening  banquet.  Although 
absent,  ray  sympathies  are  very  strongly  with  the  movement  in 
behalf  of  International  Arbitration  and  Peace,  and  I believe  it 
will  be  a great  power  for  good. 


444 

Permit  me  one  suggestion,  prompted  by  the  many  communi- 
cations I have  received  proposing  different  ways  for  bringing 
about  the  desired  result.  Let  the  Congress  spend  little  time  in 
considering  such  propositions.  Matters  of  detail,  of  procedure, 
can  be  settled  hereafter.  The  important  thing  is  that  this  Con- 
gress, speaking  for  the  entire  nation,  shall  as  its  message  to  the 
approaching  Hague  Conference,  declare  in  the  strongest  terms  its 
belief  in  the  wisdom  and  practicability  of  International  Arbitra- 
tion and  Peace,  and  its  call  upon  that  Conference  to  take  the 
widest  and  most  effective  measures  to  hasten  the  promised  day 
of  their  universal  triumph.  David  J.  Brewer. 

MISCELLANEOUS 

Baltimore,  Maryland,  April  16,  1907. 

Baltimore  Presbytery  now  in  session  sends  greetings.  Micah 
4,  3 : “And  they  shall  beat  their  swords  into  plowshares,  and  their 
spears  into  pruning  hooks ; nation  shall  not  lift  up  a sword  against 
nation,  neither  shall  they  learn  war  any  more.” 

A.  M.  Eagle,  Moderator. 

Redlands,  California,  April  13,  1907. 

I am  inexpressibly  pained  that  distance  from  home  prevents 
my  personal  attendance  at  this  Congress,  which  I consider  one  of 
the  greatest  advance  steps  toward  universal  International  Arbi- 
tration in  the  history  of  the  world,  and  for  the  organization  of 
which  America  owes  you  a great  debt  of  gratitude. 

Albert  K.  Smiley. 

Washington,  D.  C.,  April  16,  1907. 

The  Conference  of  Church  Clubs  of  the  United  States  as- 
sembled at  the  Peace  Cross,  Washington,  sends  greetings  to  the 
International  Congress  of  Peace  and  Arbitration,  and  bids  it  God- 
speed in  its  endeavors  to  promote  the  Kingdom  of  Peace  and 
good-will  among  men. 

Jackson  W.  Sparrow,  Secretary. 

Richmond,  Kentucky,  April  16,  1907. 

In  1888,  I introduced  a bill  in  Congress  which  passed,  provid- 
ing for  an  International  Conference  to  consider  Arbitration,  which 
was  endorsed.  I am  in  favor  of  general  arbitration  treaty  among 
nations  and  I shall  make  my  best  efforts  in  the  United  States 


445 

Senate  for  this  great  achievement.  I hope  the  Hague  Court  will 
be  increased  in  power  and  permanence. 

James  B.  McCreary, 

United  States  Senator  from  Kentucky. 

Yazoo  City,  Mississippi,  April  3d,  1907. 

I cannot  too  much  impress  upon  you  an  idea,  which  I have 
talked  over  with  the  President  of  the  United  States,  and  which 
was  embodied  in  a resolution  of  mine  endorsed  by  the  American 
delegates  and  referred  to  and  carried  over  by  the  Executive 
Committee  of  the  last  Congress,  which  was  held  at  London. 
That  idea  is  to  give  stability  and  permanency  and  independence 
to  the  Hague  Court,  as  well  as  dignity  to  its  personnel,  by 
having  each  country  pay  a good,  substantial  salary  to  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Court  appointed  by  it,  by  giving  them  a long  tenure 
of  office,  either  for  life,  or  for  ten  or  fifteen  years,  by  forbid- 
ding them  to  act  as  counsel  for  any  nation,  while  holding  a 
place  as  member  of  the  Court,  thus  enabling  each  country  to 
select  international  lawyers  of  international  reputation  who  can 
make  a long  work,  if  not  a life  work,  of  the  objects  set  before 
the  Hague  Court  for  accomplishment.  My  plan  further  em- 
bodied the  idea  of  making  it  a part  of  the  duty  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Court  to  collate  the  recognized  principles  of  inter- 
national law  and  to  suggest  to  the  nations  of  the  earth 
amendments  thereto,  in  furtherance  of  the  general  object  of 
making  arbitration,  and  not  war,  as  far  as  possible,  the  means 
of  settlement  of  issues  arising  between  sovereignties.  Of  course, 
all  the  members  of  the  Hague  Court  never  act  as  arbitrators  at 
any  one  time,  but  no  member  of  the  Court  ought  to  be  permitted 
to  be  an  attorney  before  his  fellow  members  representing  any 
nation  which  has  a controversy  before  the  Court.  It  follows  that 
in  order  to  make  it  a great  international  lawyer’s  worth-while 
to  take  a place  upon  the  Court — surrendering  this  privilege, 
that  he  should  have  a good  salary.  If  the  Court  be  given  the 
dignity  and  prestige,  which  this  would  give  it,  then  when  matters 
at  issue  are  left  to  controversy,  they  will  always  be  left  to  the 
Court  itself  instead  of  having  a government  here  and  there 
suggest  some  other  sort  of  arbitration.  My  idea  is  to  make  the 
Court  of  the  Hague  an  Amphyctionic  Council  of  the  civilized 
world.  John  Sharp  Williams, 

Congressman  from  Mississippi  and  Member  of 
Interparliamentary  Group. 


446 


Representatives  of  Foreign  Countries  who 
Participated  in  the  Congress 

GREAT  BRITAIN. 

Dr.  John  Rhys,  Head  of  Jesus’  College  and  Pro  Vice-Chancellor  of 
the  University  of  Oxford. 

The  Rev.  E.  S.  Roberts,  Master  of  Gonville  and  Caius  College  and 
Vice-Chancellor  of  the  University  of  Cambridge. 

Colonel  Sir  Robert  Cranston,  ex-Lord  Provost  of  Edinburgh. 

Dr.  John  Ross,  Chairman  Carnegie  Dumferline  Trust. 

Provost  Macbeth,  Dumferline. 

W.  T.  Stead,  Editor  Review  of  Reviews. 

Sir  Robert  Ball,  F.R.S.,  Professor  of  Astronomy  at  the  University  of 
Cambridge. 

Dr.  P.  Chalmers  Mitchell,  F.R.S.,  Secretary  Zoological  Society  of 
London. 

Sir  William  Henry  Preece,  F.R.S.,  Electrical  Engineer. 

Mr.  William  Archer,  Dramatic  Critic,  London  Tribune. 

Sir  Edward  Elgar,  Musical  Composer. 

FRANCE. 

Baron  d’Estournelles  de  Constant,  Member  of  French  Senate; 
head  of  French  Section  of  International  Peace  Conference. 

Paul  Doumer,  Chairman  of  the  Senate. 

J.  Rais,  Secretary  of  the  International  Conciliation  Committee. 
Leonce  Benedite,  Director  Luxembourg  Gallery,  Paris. 

Camille  Enlart,  Director  of  the  Trocadero  Museum,  Paris. 

GERMANY. 

Frederich  S.  Archenhold,  Astronomer,  Director  Theptow  Observa- 
tory. 


HOLLAND. 

Mr.  J.  M.  W.  Van  der  Poorten-Schwartz  (“Maarten  Maartens”). 
Author  and  traveler. 


THE  LIBRARY 
OF  THE 

DIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


From  Stereograph,  Copyright  1907, 
by  Underwood  & Underwood,  New  York. 


Robert  Treat  Paine 
John  Mitchell 


Hon.  Andrew  D.  White 
Albert  K.  Smiley 


Mayor  George  B.  McClellan 
Judge  David  J.  Brewer 
Hon.  Alton  B.  Parker 


447 


Subscribers  to  the  National  Arbitration  and 
Peace  Congress 

New  York  City. 


Andrew  Carnegie, 

Nathan  Bijur, 

Miss  Grace  H.  Dodge, 

M.  Hartley  Dodge, 

John  D.  Rockefeller, 

James  Speyer, 

Jacob  H.  Schiff, 

Bishop  Henry  C.  Potter, 

Morris  K.  Jesup, 

A.  R.  Shattuck, 

George  Foster  Peabody, 

E.  H.  Outerbridge, 

August  Belmont, 

James  H.  Post, 

Elbert  H.  Gary, 

Paul  Fuller, 

Thomas  F.  Ryan, 

James  A.  Byrne, 

Isaac  N.  Seligman, 

Jacob  Hasslacher, 

Alfred  Nathan, 

Warner  Miller, 

William  Church  Osborne, 

John  F.  Praeger, 

Mrs.  William  Church  Osborne, 

Henry  Rowley, 

R.  Fulton  Cutting, 

Warner  Van  Nor  den, 

John  E.  Parsons, 

John  A.  McKim, 

John  Crosby  Brown, 

Lewis  Gawtry, 

M.  Taylor  Pine, 

A.  C.  Hodenpyl, 

Frederick  Potter, 

William  F.  Allen, 

Charles  A.  Coffin, 

James  Talcott, 

Emerson  McMillin, 

Elverton  R.  Chapman, 

John  D.  Crimmins, 

William  C.  Demorest, 

James  J.  Hill, 

Franklin  Allen, 

Mrs.  Russell  Sage, 

Fred  C.  Cocheu, 

John  S.  Huyler, 

E.  C.  Schaeffer, 

Clarence  H.  Mackay, 

Walter  Frew, 

John  Claffin, 

George  Maccoullough  Miller, 

Clarence  Whitman, 

Anton  Eilers, 

William  F.  King, 

Edward  Lauterbach, 

Society  for  Ethical  Culture, 

Charles  A.  Schieren, 

Seth  Low, 

Jefferson  M.  Levy, 

Felix  Warburg, 

Newell  Martin, 

Otto  Kahn, 

George  E.  Blackwell, 

Mortimer  L.  Schiff, 

D.  P.  Kingsley, 

Cornelius  N.  Bliss, 

A.  H.  Bickmore, 

W.  Bayard  Cutting, 

Charles  S.  Davidson, 

Cleveland  H.  Dodge, 

Marshall  S.  Driggs, 

Herbert  Parsons, 

A.  Abraham, 

F.  S.  Witherbee, 

Stephen  H.  Olin, 

Francis  Lynde  Stetson, 

John  P.  Dunn, 

John  G.  Agar, 

Adolph  Lewisohn, 

Gen.  Stewart  L.  Woodford, 
Ernest  Thalman, 

George  H.  Robinson, 
William  J.  Curtis, 

Jacob  Ruppert, 

William  Ives  Washburn, 
Horace  White, 

Otto  Eidlitz, 

Henry  Siegel, 

Emil  L.  Boas, 

Marcus  M.  Marks, 

Oswald  G.  Villard, 

Robert  C.  Ogden, 

W. 


448 

L.  N.  Littauer, 

W.  Morgan  Grinnell, 

A.  S.  Bard, 

Paul  N.  Spofford, 

Lewis  H.  Spence, 

Paul  Schwarz, 

C.  M.  Wicker, 

C.  L.  Bernheimer, 
George  F.  Chamberlain, 
H.  W.  Boettger, 

G.  T.  Kirby, 

Arthur  Goadby, 

William  C.  Choate, 

Karl  Miner, 

James  Ludlow, 


Boston. 


Frederick  P.  Fish, 
William  M.  Wood, 
Robert  Treat  Paine, 
Edwin  Ginn, 

American  Peace  Society, 
Mrs.  J.  Malcolm  Forbes, 


Mrs.  Quincy  A.  Shaw, 
Mrs.  Dudley  L.  Pickman, 
James  J.  Storrow, 

Fred  Brooks, 

Mrs.  Mary  E.  Atkinson, 
Arthur  Perry, 

Joseph  Lee. 


Philadelphia. 


Joshua  L.  Baily, 

Isaac  H.  Clothier, 

Henry  C.  Lee, 

The  Estate  of  Ruth  Anna  Cope, 
John  K Milholland, 

George  Burnham,  Jr. 

William  T.  Henzey, 

Asa  Wing, 

Francis  R.  Cope, 

John  B. 


Walter  Wood, 
Elliston  T.  Morris, 
Samuel  Snellenburg, 
John  B.  Rhoads, 
William  W.  Justice, 
J.  Campbell  Harris, 
John  Story  Jenks, 
Mrs.  Evan  Randolph, 
George  F.  Edmunds, 
Garrett. 


Pittsburg. 

George  Westinghouse. 

Chicago. 

A.  C.  Bartlett,  Edward  Morri6. 


New  Haven. 
Simon  E.  Baldwin. 


Colorado  Springs. 
Gen.  William  J.  Palmer. 


449 

The  registered  delegates  represented  organizations  and  institutions 
divided  into  the  following  groups : 

Chambers  of  Commerce,  Boards  of  Trade  and  other  Associations  of 


Business  Men 166 

Legislative  Bodies  - -.-.------29 

Bar  Associations - 11 

Municipalities 87 

Mayors 13 

Labor  Organizations 26 

Colleges,  Universities  and  High  Schools 167 

Educational  and  Literary  Societies 40 

Newspapers,  Magazines  and  other  Publications  - - - - 16 

Churches,  Religious  and  Ethical  Societies 285 

Philanthropic  and  Reform  Societies 122 

Peace  Societies ----94 

Miscellaneous  National  Organizations 77 

Miscellaneous  Local  Organizations  - - - - - - -120 


DELEGATES 


Mrs.  Martha  S.  Gielow, 

Hon.  John  B.  Knox, 
Mrs.  John  B.  Knox, 
Col.  R.  A.  Mitchell, 

L.  B.  Musgrove, 

Mrs.  G.  W.  Patterson, 
J.  W.  Tomlinson, 

Mrs.  J.  W.  Tomlinson, 
W.  H.  Woodward, 


Mrs.  R.  C.  Thompson, 


ALABAMA. 

The  Southern  Industrial  Educational  Associa- 
tion, Greensboro. 

State  of  Alabama,  Anniston. 

United  Daughters  of  Confederacy,  Anniston. 
State  of  Alabama,  Gadsden. 

“Mountain  Eagle,”  Jasper. 

State  of  Alabama,  Montgomery. 

Board  of  Trade,  Birmingham. 

“Birmingham  Age  Herald,”  Birmingham. 
Commercial  Club,  Birmingham. 

ARKANSAS. 

David  O.  Dodd  Chapter,  United  Daughters  of 
Confederacy,  Pine  Bluff. 


Mrs.  Jacob  Baruch, 

Prof.  W.  W.  Campbell, 

Mrs.  Frank  B.  Silverwood, 
Mrs.  Fred  W.  Wood, 


CALIFORNIA. 

The  Friday  Morning  Club,  Los  Angeles. 
Astronomical  and  Astrophysical  Society  of 
America,  Los  Angeles. 

“The  Ebell,”  Los  Angeles. 

The  Friday  Morning  Club,  Los  Angeles. 


COLORADO. 

Dr.  James  A.  Hart,  City  of  Colorado  Springs,  Colorado  Springs. 

W.  F.  Slocum,  State  of  Colorado,  Colorado  Springs. 


29 


Mrs.  A.  E.  Abrams, 

Mrs.  Alva  E.  Abrams, 

Mrs.  C.  H.  Adler, 

Max  Adler, 

S.  M.  Albarian, 

S.  E.  Baldwin, 

Hon.  Morris  B.  Beardsley, 
Henry  A.  Bishop, 

I.  W.  Birdseye, 

Mrs.  F.  S.  Bolton, 

Joseph  S.  G.  Bolton, 
Clarence  H.  Bolton, 

S.  Augustus  Brush, 

Fred  S.  Camp, 

Rev.  J.  B.  Connell, 

Mrs.  Frederick  Dart, 

Mrs.  Mary  R.  Gale  Davis, 
Samuel  Lee  Dibble, 

Rev.  W.  F.  Dickerman, 

Robert  C.  Dougherty, 

Dr.  F.  B.  Downs, 

Fred  Enos, 

Rev.  George  H.  Ewing, 

Prof.  Henry  W.  Farnum, 
Charles  Gay, 

Rev.  Walter  Gay, 

Gen.  E.  S.  Greeley, 

Rev.  W.  O.  Harris, 

Rev.  Artemas  J.  Haynes, 
Rev.  A.  S.  Hawkes, 

Rev.  M.  C.  Hoefer, 
Winfield  S.  Huson, 

Mrs.  C.  H.  Keyes, 

Frank  J.  Lindsley, 

Rev.  Charles  J.  McElroy, 
Rev.  E.  N.  Packard, 

Ralph  S.  Pagter, 

Rev.  R.  H.  Potter, 

Harold  I.  Gardener, 

T.  H.  McKenzie, 

Prof.  A.  R.  Merian, 
Halsey  W.  Kelly, 

James  B.  Merwin, 


450 

CONNECTICUT. 

Connecticut  Congress  of  Mothers,  Hartford. 
Hartford  Mothers’  Club,  Hartford. 

Connecticut  Peace  Society,  Hartford. 

City  of  New  Haven,  New  Haven. 

Hartford  Theological  Seminary,  Hartford. 
Judiciary  Committee,  New  Haven. 

City  of  Bridgeport,  Bridgeport. 

City  of  Bridgeport,  Bridgeport. 

Sons  American  Revolution,  Bridgeport. 

New  Haven  Mothers’  Club,  New  Haven. 

S.  S.  Church  of  Messiah,  New  Haven. 

S.  S.  Church  of  Messiah,  New  Haven. 
Greenwich  Board  of  Trade,  Greenwich. 

First  Congregational  Church,  Stamford. 
Baptist  Church,  Wethersfield. 

State  Federation  of  Women’s  Clubs,  Niantic. 
Mothers’  Congress  of  Connecticut,  Bridgeport. 
Business  Men’s  Association,  New  Haven. 
Connecticut  Universalist  Convention,  New 
Haven. 

Hartford  Theological  Seminary,  Hartford. 
Bridgeport  Board  of  Trade,  Bridgeport. 
Bridgeport  Board  of  Trade,  Bridgeport. 

First  Congregational  Church  of  Norwich 
Town. 

American  Economic  Association,  New  Haven. 
First  Universalist  Society,  New  Haven. 

Union  Baptist  Church,  Hartford. 

National  Society  Sons  of  American  Revolu- 
tion, New  Haven. 

Union  Baptist  Church,  Stamford. 

United  Congregational  Church,  New  Haven. 
Hartford  Theological  Seminary,  Hartford. 
Hartford  Theological  Seminary,  Hartford. 
City  of  Derby,  Derby. 

Connecticut  Congress  of  Mothers,  Hartford. 
Business  Men’s  Association,  New  Haven. 

City  of  Bridgeport,  Bridgeport. 

Stratford  Congregational  Church,  Stratford. 
Business  Men’s  Association,  New  Haven. 
Connecticut  Peace  Society,  Hartford. 

Hartford  Theological  Seminary,  Hartford. 
Board  of  Trade,  Southington. 

Hartford  Theological  Seminary,  Hartford. 
Business  Men’s  Association,  New  Haven. 
First  Congregational  Church,  Middlefield. 


Prof.  Edwin  K Mitchell, 
Rev.  W.  J.  Mutch, 

David  F.  Read, 

James  H.  Roberts, 

Mr.  Ruecker, 

Grace  G.  Seton, 

Hon.  Morris  W.  Seymour, 
Judge  Joseph  Sheldon, 

L.  H.  Stevens, 

Frederick  B.  Street, 

S.  H.  Street, 

George  S.  Talcott, 
Alexander  Troup, 

Mrs.  Laura  C.  Tucker, 

Hon.  George  W.  Wheeler, 
Howard  R.  Williams, 
Albert  R.  Williams, 

Henry  Womach, 

Prof.  T.  S.  Woolsey, 
Watson  Woodruff, 


Charles  B.  Evans, 

S.  Garland, 

J.  Harvey  Whiteman, 


Mrs.  Katherine  L.  Eagan, 


Mrs.  Estelle  G.  Baker, 
Hon.  James  H.  Blount, 
A.  O.  Granger, 

Mrs.  James  Jackson, 


Jane  Addams, 
George  Fulk, 

Mrs.  B.  Harding, 
George  A.  Lawrence, 
Mrs.  W.  J.  Johnston, 
Charles  E.  Kremer, 
Thomas  McClelland, 
Judge  Lambert  Tree, 
George  Henderson, 


451 

City  of  Hartford,  Hartford. 

Howard  Avenue  Congregational  Church,  New 
Haven. 

City  of  Bridgeport,  Bridgeport. 

Hartford  Theological  Seminary,  Hartford. 
Hartford  Theological  Seminary,  Hartford. 
League  of  American  Pen  Women — Washing- 
ton, D.  C.,  Coscob. 

Society  of  Foreign  Wars,  Bridgeport. 

First  Universalist  Society,  New  Haven. 
Greenwich  Board  of  Trade,  Greenwich. 
Business  Men’s  Association,  New  Haven. 
Business  Men’s  League,  New  Haven. 

City  of  New  Britain,  New  Britain. 

The  New  Haven  Union,  New  Haven. 

First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  New  Lon- 
don. 

Board  of  Trade,  Bridgeport. 

Hartford  Theological  Seminary,  Hartford. 
Hartford  Theological  Seminary,  Hartford. 
The  Union  Baptist  Church,  Stamford. 

City  of  New  Haven,  New  Haven. 

Hartford  Theological  Seminary,  Hartford. 

DELAWARE. 

State  Bar  Association,  Newark. 

State  Bar  Association,  Wilmington. 

State  Bar  Association,  Wilmington. 

FLORIDA. 

Woman’s  Club,  Jacksonville. 

GEORGIA. 

Atlanta  Woman’s  Club,  Atlanta. 

City  of  Macon,  Macon. 

City  of  Cartersville,  Cartersville. 

State  Federation  of  Women’s  Clubs,  Atlanta. 

ILLINOIS. 

Chicago  Peace  Society,  Chicago. 

Bethany  Bible  School  Peace  Society,  Cerro 
Gordo. 

United  Daughters  of  Confederacy,  Chicago. 
Illinois  State  Bar  Association,  Galesburg. 
Vassar  Students’  Aid  of  Chicago,  Evanston. 
State  Bar  Association  of  Illinois,  Chicago. 
Knox  College,  Galesburg. 

International  Arbitration  Society  of  Chicago. 
Third  Memorial  Church,  Chicago. 


Prof.  Amos.  S.  Hershey, 
Mrs.  Amos.  S.  Hershey, 
Albert  E.  Metzger, 

Leo.  M.  Rappaport, 

F.  M.  Ryan, 

Peter  Scherer, 

Mrs.  May  Wright  Sewall, 


Charles  Noble  Gregory, 
Albert  Cheadle, 

Pres.  Hill  M.  Bell, 

Pres.  Geo.  E.  MacLean, 
W.  J.  Patton, 

Pres.  Wm.  Goodell  Frost, 
Mrs.  Wm.  Goodell  Frost, 
Rev.  D.  A.  Gaddie, 

James  K.  Patterson, 

Mrs.  Laura  A.  White, 


Pres.  E.  B.  Craighead, 


F.  B.  Milliken, 

Charles  Israelson, 
Frederick  C.  Dearborn, 
Everett  K.  Day, 

Natilie  Kirsch, 

Mrs.  Hannah  J.  Bailey, 

Horace  Purinton, 

Mrs.  Alice  Purinton, 


Rev.  Oliver  Huckel, 

J.  V.  L.  Findlay, 
William  W.  Mclntire, 
S.  D.  McConnell, 
Henry  C.  Matthews, 
Eugene  Levering, 
Mary  E.  Garrett, 
James  W.  Cain, 

Mrs.  W.  J.  Brown, 


452 

INDIANA. 

Indiana  University,  Bloomington. 

Indiana  University,  Bloomington. 

City  of  Indianapolis,  Indianapolis. 

North  American  Gymnastic  Union,  Indianap- 
olis. 

International  Association  Bridge  and  Struc- 
tural Iron  Workers,  Indianapolis. 

North  American  Gymnastic  Union,  Indian- 
apolis. 

International  Council  of  Women,  Indianapolis. 
IOWA. 

Iowa  State  Bar  Association,  Iowa  City. 

City  of  Ottumwa,  Ottumwa. 

Drake  University,  Des  Moines. 

City  of  Iowa  City,  Iowa  City. 

Sons  of  Veterans,  Mason  City. 

KENTUCKY. 

Berea  College,  Berea. 

Berea  College,  Berea. 

Green  Street  Baptist  Church  of  Louisville. 
State  College  of  Kentucky,  Lexington. 

Ashland  Equal  Rights  Association,  Ashland. 

LOUISIANA. 

Tulane  University,  New  Orleans. 

MAINE. 

Board  of  Trade,  Portland. 

Board  of  Trade,  Rumford  Falls. 

Board  of  Trade,  Portland. 

Board  of  Trade,  Rumford  Falls. 

The  American  Peace  Society,  Eliot. 

Woman’s  Christian  Temperance  Union,  Win- 
throp  Centre. 

First  Baptist  Church,  Waterville. 

First  Baptist  Church,  Waterville. 

MARYLAND. 

The  Pres.  Cong.  Reformed  Church,  Baltimore. 
City  of  Baltimore,  Baltimore. 

City  of  Baltimore,  Baltimore. 

State  of  Maryland,  Easton. 

Lumber  Exchange,  Baltimore. 

Johns  Hopkins  University,  Baltimore. 

Bryn  Mawr  College,  Baltimore. 

Washington  College,  Chestertown. 

Baltimore  Suffrage  Club,  Baltimore. 


Mrs.  Elizabeth  Y.  Case, 
Mrs.  Robbins, 

Col.  Oswald  Tilghman, 
Alice  Thompson, 

George  W.  F.  Vernon, 
Gov.  Edwin  Warfield, 

453 

Baltimore  Suffrage  Club,  Baltimore. 

Colonial  Dames,  Baltimore. 

State  of  Maryland,  Annapolis. 

Colonial  Dames,  Baltimore. 

State  of  Maryland,  Baltimore. 

State  of  Maryland,  Annapolis. 

Clara  B.  Adams, 

MASSACHUSETTS. 

1884  Club,  Lynn. 

M.  W.  Alexander,  American  Peace  Society,  Lynn. 

Mrs.  Fannie  Fern  Andrews,  American  Peace  Society,  Boston. 


Mrs.  F.  N.  Barbour, 

Rev.  Charles  E.  Beals, 

Winthrop  Equal  Suffrage  League,  Winthrop. 
Prospect  Street  Congregational  Church,  Cam- 
bridge. 

Rev.  A.  A.  Berle, 

E.  Blakeslee, 

Rev.  S.  C.  Bushnell, 

City  of  Salem,  Salem. 

American  Peace  Society,  Boston. 

American  Peace  Society,  Arlington. 

Rev.  Andrew  B.  Chalmers,  Plymouth  Congregational  Church,  Worcester. 
Hon.  Lloyd  E.  Chamberlain,  State  Board  of  Health,  Brockton. 

Walstein  R.  Chester,  State  Board  of  Health,  Brookline. 


Dr.  M.  Chirurg, 

George  E.  Dey, 

H.  M.  Dyckman, 

Karl  Eberhard, 

Anna  B.  Eckstein, 

William  H.  Frazier, 

Edwin  Ginn, 

William  C.  Gordon, 

Mrs.  William  C.  Gordon, 
George  A.  Fiel, 

T.  B.  Fitzpatrick, 

W.  G.  Harding, 

A.  E.  Hemphill, 

Charles  C.  Hoyt, 

Mrs.  Charles  C.  Hoyt, 
George  H.  Huntington, 
Fletcher  S.  Hyde, 

Dr.  Theodore  P.  Ion. 
William  James, 

Elizabeth  Kendall, 

Rev.  Albert  Lazenby, 

Mrs.  Carrie  S.  Lewis, 

J.  A.  Linen, 

W.  D.  McCrackan, 

Edwin  D.  Mead, 

Mrs.  Lucia  Ames  Mead, 
Mrs.  G.  W.  Metcalf, 

Robert  Treat  Paine, 

American  Peace  Society,  Boston. 

Young  Men’s  Christian  Ass’n,  Somerville. 

First  Congregational  Church,  Westfield. 

North  American  Gymnastic  Union,  Boston. 
American  Peace  Society,  Boston. 

Second  Congregational  Society,  Lynn. 

The  International  School  of  Peace,  Boston. 
Second  Congregational  Church,  Westfield. 
Second  Congregational  Church,  Westfield. 
Business  Men’s  Association,  Waltham. 

Boston  Merchants’  Association,  Brookline. 
Business  Men’s  Association,  Pittsfield. 

Business  Men’s  Association,  Holyoke. 

New  England  Shoe  & Leather  Ass’n,  Boston. 
New  England  Shoe  & Leather  Ass’n,  Boston. 
Hartford  Theological  Seminary,  Milton. 

Public  High  School,  Malden. 

Boston  University,  Boston. 

American  Society  of  Naturalists,  Cambridge. 
Wellesley  College,  Wellesley. 

Unitarian  Church,  Lynn. 

1884  Club,  Lynn. 

Williams  College,  Williamstown. 

Christian  Science  Periodicals,  Boston. 

American  Peace  Society,  Boston. 

American  Peace  Society,  Boston. 

American  Peace  Society,  Boston. 

American  Peace  Society,  Boston. 

Dr.  Moses  Greeley  Parker, 

454 

General  Society  Sons  American  Revolution, 
Lowell. 

Victor  H.  Pattsits, 

Mrs.  Mary  A.  Pettingell, 
Prof.  Edward  C.  Pickering, 

American  Antiquarian  Society,  Worcester. 
American  Peace  Society,  Boston, 

Astronomical  and  Astrophysieal  Societies  of 
America,  Cambridge. 

Mrs.  Angelica  E.  Post, 

Hon.  Josiah  Quincy, 

Francis  B.  Sayre, 

Sara  Schryvier, 

Helen  H.  Seabury, 

Mary  B.  Seabury, 

Mrs.  George  H.  Shapley, 
George  S.  Smith, 

Charles  S.  Soule, 

Mrs.  Emily  B.  Smith, 

John  H.  Storer, 

Mrs.  Ida  J.  Tapley, 
Benjamin  F.  Trueblood, 
Rev.  James  L.  Tryon, 

Lena  Vesey, 

William  G.  Ward, 

C.  M.  Wheaton, 

Mary  E.  Woolley, 

C.  J.  H.  Woodbury, 

Prof.  Miinsterberg, 

C.  S.  Hamlin, 

American  Peace  Society,  Boston. 

City  of  Boston,  Boston. 

Williams  College,  Williamstown. 

Equal  Suffrage  League,  Winthrop  Highlands. 
American  Peace  Society,  New  Bedford. 
American  Peace  Society,  New  Bedford. 
American  Peace  Society,  Boston. 

National  Association  of  Clothiers,  Boston. 
Somerville  Hospital,  Somerville. 

The  Whittier  Home  Association,  Amesbury. 
City  of  Waltham,  Waltham. 

Lynn  Woman’s  Club,  Lynn. 

American  Peace  Society,  Newton  Highlands. 
American  Peace  Society,  Waltham. 

First  Baptist  Church,  Stoneham. 

Federation  of  Women’s  Clubs,  Boston. 

Boston  Peace  Association,  Newtonville. 

Mt.  Holyoke  College,  South  Hadley. 

National  Association  of  Cotton  Mfrs.,  Boston. 
Harvard  University,  Cambridge. 

American  Bar  Association,  Boston. 

Clara  A.  Avery, 

Homer  L.  Boyle, 

August  F.  Bruske, 

J.  E.  Hutchinson, 

Francis  W.  Kelsey, 

H.  D.  Luce, 

P.  F.  H.  Morley, 

Albert  M.  Todd, 

M.  W.  Tanner, 

John  Prindle  Scott, 

E.  A.  Robertson, 

MICHIGAN. 

State  Federation  of  Women’s  Clubs,  Detroit. 
State  of  Michigan,  Grand  Rapids. 

Alma  College,  Alma. 

State  of  Michigan,  Fennville. 

American  Philological  Ass’n,  Ann  Arbor. 

City  of  Lansing,  Lansing. 

Board  of  Trade,  Saginaw. 

A.  M.  Todd  Co.,  Ltd.,  Kalamazoo. 

Board  of  Trade,  Saginaw. 

Board  of  Trade,  Saginaw. 

Board  of  Trade,  Saginaw. 

Rev.  C.  E.  Burton, 

Dr.  James  Wallace, 

MINNESOTA. 

Lyndale  Church,  Minneapolis. 

National  Peace  Society,  St.  Paul. 

James  Arbuckle, 

Mrs.  James  Arbuckle, 

MISSOURI. 

Foreign  Trade  Association,  St.  Louis. 

Latin  American  Club,  St.  Louis. 

Hon.  Richard  Bartholdt, 
Ella  Boyd, 

E.  B.  Brown, 

Janies  F.  Coyle, 

H.  M.  Evans, 

T.  K.  Medeinghaus, 

C.  D.  Parker, 

Charles  J.  Schmelzer, 


William  J.  Crittenden, 
Mrs.  J.  A.  Hoge, 


Hon.  Wm.  Jennings  Bryan, 


A.  L.  Adams, 

Rev.  Sylvester  W.  Beach, 
Mrs.  M.  G.  Belloni, 
William  Biggart, 

Joel  Borton, 

Charles  G.  Bliss, 

Edwin  A.  Bradley, 

Mrs.  William  T.  Brown, 
Mrs.  L.  E.  Brown, 

Ernest  Bunzel, 

Harold  S.  Buttenheim, 
Dr.  H.  A.  Bultz, 

Mrs.  A.  D.  Chandler, 

J.  H.  Christie, 

Mrs.  J.  H.  Christie, 

Mrs.  Alexander  Crystie, 
Edward  M.  Colie, 

Louise  Connolly, 

Andrew  J.  Corcoran, 

C.  Fred  Cunningham, 
Rev.  George  S.  Curtis, 
Mrs.  C.  W.  B.  Cushing, 

Edward  A.  Day, 

Mrs.  Henry  H.  Dawson, 
Mrs.  W.  S.  Decker, 
Warren  Dixon, 

Mrs.  Herbert  A.  Drake, 
Hon.  Amzi  Dodd, 

Allison  Dodd, 


455 

American  Arbitration  Group,  St.  Louis. 
United  Daughters  of  Confederacy,  St.  Joseph. 
Business  Men’s  League,  St.  Louis. 

Latin  American  Club,  St.  Louis. 

City  of  Kansas  City,  Kansas  City. 

Business  Men’s  League,  St.  Louis. 

City  of  Kansas  City,  Kansas  City. 

City  of  Kansas  City,  Kansas  City. 

MONTANA. 

First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  Butte. 

United  Daughters  of  Confederacy,  Bozemen. 

NEBRASKA. 

Lincoln. 

NEW  JERSEY. 

Stevens  Institute,  Bloomfield. 

First  Church,  Princeton. 

Women's  Club  of  Glen  Ridge,  Glen  Ridge. 
Mayor  of  Bloomfield,  Bloomfield. 

Committee  for  the  Advancement  of  Friends’ 
Principles  of  General  Congress,  Woodstown. 
First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  Westfield. 
Young  Men’s  Christian  Association,  Montclair. 
Women’s  Club  of  Orange,  East  Orange. 
Wheaton  Club  of  New  York,  Upper  Montclair. 
International  Watch  Co.,  Jersey  City. 

Young  Men’s  Christian  Association,  Madison. 
Drew  Theological  Seminary,  Madison. 
Consumers’  League  of  New  Jersey,  Orange. 
Public  Schools,  Bayonne. 

Public  Schools,  Bayonne. 

Political  Study  Club,  Bayonne. 

State  Bar  Association,  Newark. 

Public  Schools,  Summit. 

Jersey  City. 

Stevens  Institute,  Paterson. 

The  Mayor,  Bloomfield. 

Consumers’  League  of  New  Jersey,  East 
Orange. 

State  Bar  Association,  Morristown. 

State  Federation  Women’s  Clubs,  Newark. 
Political  Study  Club,  Orange. 

New  Jersey  Bar  Association,  Jersey  City. 
Fortnightly  Club,  Haddonfield. 

City  of  Bloomfield,  Bloomfield. 

City  of  Bloomfield,  Bloomfield. 


W.  H.  Eldridge, 

W.  O.  Fayerweather, 

Mrs.  James  M.  Fisk, 

Rev.  W.  E.  Fort, 

Rev.  Daniel  R.  Foster, 
William  M.  Gilbert, 

Albert  F.  Gilmore, 

Thomas  P.  Graham, 

Mlrs.  F.  G.  Green, 

Emerson  P.  Harris, 

Mrs.  Thomas  S.  Henry, 

E.  S.  Hersh, 

E.  C.  Hill, 

Samuel  J.  Holmes, 

Rev.  J.  F.  Horn, 

Samuel  Huntington, 

Mrs.  Samuel  Huntington, 

J.  Howard  Hulsart, 

Mrs.  J.  Howard  Hulsart, 
Rev.  W.  R.  Hunt, 

Mrs.  W.  R.  Hunt, 

Dr.  Mary  D.  Hussey, 

Mrs.  Anna  B.  Jeffery, 

Rev.  Louis  Herald  Johnston, 
Rev.  W.  S.  Jones, 

Mrs.  E.  A.  Kilborn, 

Mrs.  Kinsley, 

Rev.  D.  H.  King, 

M.  H.  Kinsley, 

T.  W.  Kirkman, 

B.  J.  Klein, 

R.  L.  Lane, 

Mrs.  Arthur  Lary, 

Ada  L.  Lemhart, 

Jeremiah  Lisk,  Jr., 

James  M.  Ludlow, 

George  J.  McEwan, 

Rev.  H.  W.  McGuire, 

Joseph  McManus, 

E.  Mackey, 

Prof.  Allan  Marquand, 
Henry  M.  Maxson, 

Mrs.  John  L.  Meeker, 

A.  B.  Meredith, 

Mrs.  A.  B.  Meredith, 


Schools  of  New  Jersey,  Williamstown. 
Taxpayers’  Ass’n  of  Paterson,  Paterson. 
Philitscipoma  Club,  Newark. 

First  Baptist  Church,  Freehold. 

City  of  Trenton,  Trenton. 

Unitarian  Church,  Vineland. 

Bates  College,  Upper  Montclair. 

City  of  Paterson,  Paterson. 

Wheaton  Club,  Upper  Montclair. 

Unity  Church,  Montclair. 

State  Legal  Aid  Association,  Newark. 

Board  of  Trade,  Elizabeth. 

City  of  Trenton,  Trenton. 

Congregational  Church,  Montclair. 

First  Presbyterian  Church,  Whippany. 
Unitarian  Church,  Plainfield. 

Woman’s  Equal  Suffrage  Ass’n,  Plainfield. 
Department  Education,  Dover. 

Department  Education,  Dover. 

First  Unitarian  Church,  Orange. 

First  Unitarian  Church,  Orange. 

Medical  Club  of  Newark,  East  Orange. 
Orange  Political  Study  Club,  South  Orange. 
Congregational  Church,  Ocean  Grove. 

City  of  Trenton,  Trenton. 

Civic  Club,  Arlington. 

Women’s  Club,  Hoboken. 

First  Presbyterian  Church,  Vineland. 
Department  of  Education,  Hoboken. 

Stevens  Institute,  Hoboken. 

Stevens  Institute,  Jersey  City. 

Stevens  Institute,  Hoboken. 

New  Jersey  Society  Daughters  of  Revolution, 
Jersey  City. 

First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  Jersey  City. 
Civic  Club,  Bayonne. 

City  of  East  Orange,  East  Orange. 

City  of  Jersey  City,  Jersey  City. 

City  of  Bayonne,  Bayonne. 

Board  of  Trade,  Elizabeth. 

Public  Schools,  Trenton. 

Princeton  University,  Princeton. 

Board  of  Education,  Plainfield. 

State  Federation  Women’s  Clubs,  Newark. 
State  of  New  Jersey,  Essex  County  Depart- 
ment Public  Instruction,  Nutley. 

State  of  New  Jersey,  Essex  County  Depart- 
ment Public  Instruction,  Nutley. 


Agnes  Miller, 

William  George  Nelson, 
Rev.  A.  C.  Nickerson, 

Hon.  Thomas  Oakes, 

Otto  Ortel, 

Mrs.  John  R.  Paddock, 
Juliet  Stuart  Points, 

Rev.  Horace  Porter, 

H.  G.  Prout, 

Rev.  F.  B.  Reazor, 

A.  Riesenberger, 

Mrs.  Alfred  B.  Robinson, 
Rev.  Julian  Scholl, 

Charlotte  Schetter, 

Mrs.  Theodore  F.  Seward, 

Rev.  J.  Franklin  Shindell, 

E.  D.  Smith, 

Elias  D.  Smith, 

Dr.  Sara  C.  Spottiswood, 
Rev.  J.  D.  Steele, 

Mrs.  George  Sturck, 

Rabbi  Nathan  Stern, 

Dr.  H.  S.  Stewart, 

Rev.  S.  M.  Studdiford, 
Edward  K.  Sumerwell, 

Mrs.  Edward  K.  Sumerwell 
Rev.  J.  M.  Surtees, 

William  P.  Sutphen, 

G.  E.  Terwilliger, 

Rev.  W.  M.  Trumbower, 

W.  von  Voigtlander, 

F.  C.  Van  Dyck, 

Rev.  F.  Hawley  Van  Eps, 
Mrs.  Mary  Gregory  Webb, 
Rev.  Edgar  S.  Weirs, 

Mrs.  Anna  C.  Westheimer, 
William  A.  Wetzel, 

Mrs.  William  Ai.  Wetzel, 
Robert  E.  Willis, 

Mary  Willets, 

O.  I.  Woodley, 

Benjamin  C.  Wooster, 

Mrs.  Frank  J.  Woulfe, 
David  Henry  Wright, 

Mrs.  David  Henry  Wright, 
Pheobe  C.  Wright, 


457 

Orange  Political  Study  Club,  Orange. 

City  of  Jersey  City,  Jersey  City. 

First  Unitarian  Society,  Plainfield. 

Board  of  Education,  Bloomfield. 

New  Jersey  Educational  Association,  Union. 
Woman’s  Christian  Temperance  Union,  Orange. 
Barnard  College,  Jersey  City  Heights. 
Congregational  Church,  Montclair. 

Chamber  of  Commerce,  Nutley. 

St.  Mark’s  Parish,  West  Orange. 

Stevens  Institute,  Hoboken. 

Woman’s  Club  of  Upper  Montclair,  Montclair. 
First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  Jersey  City. 
Women’s  Natl.  Single  Tax  League,  Orange. 
National  Society  of  New  England  Women, 
East  Orange. 

First  Baptist  Church,  Highwood  Park. 

Board  of  Trade,  Elizabeth. 

Board  of  Trade,  Elizabeth. 

Woman’s  Club,  Orange. 

First  Presbyterian  Church,  Passaic. 

New  Jersey  Society  Daughters  American  Revo- 
lution, Jersey  City. 

City  of  Trenton,  Trenton. 

Calvary  Baptist  Church,  Hackensack. 

City  of  Trenton,  Trenton. 

State  Civic  Federation,  East  Orange. 

, State  Civic  Federation,  East  Orange. 
Manasquan  Civic  League,  Atlantic  City. 

City  of  Bloomfield,  Bloomfield. 

Stevens  Institute,  Hoboken. 

Mi.  E.  Church,  Bayonne. 

Stevens  Institute,  Hoboken. 

Taxpayers’  Ass’n  of  N.  J.,  Paterson. 

Grace  Presbyterian  Church,  Passaic. 

Women’s  Club,  Glen  Ridge. 

Unity  Church,  Montclair. 

Bayonne  Political  Study  Club,  Bayonne. 
Trenton  High  School,  Trenton. 

Trenton  High  School,  Trenton. 

Stevens  Institute,  Elizabeth. 

Friends’  Meeting  of  Shrewsbury,  Seagirt. 
State  Educational  Board,  Passaic. 

Educational  Society  of  N.  J.,  Hackensack. 
Decatur  Woman’s  Club,  East  Orange. 
Universal  Peace  Union,  Riverton. 

Universal  Peace  Union,  Riverton. 

Friends’  Meeting  of  Shrewsbury,  Shrewsbury. 


458 

Mrs.  Charles  B.  Yardley,  Essex  Chapter  Daughters  American  Revolu- 
tion, East  Orange. 

Mrs.  D.  M.  Davidson,  Women’s  Club,  Rutherford. 


NEW  MEXICO. 

L.  Bradford  Prince,  Santa  Fe  Board  of  Trade. 


Mary  Bridgers, 

F.  H.  Busbee, 

Mrs.  Hayne  Davis, 

Franklin  S.  Blair, 
Mrs.  Ella  Weill, 


Hon.  N.  J.  Bachelder, 
Rev.  T.  Chalmers,  D.D., 
James  F.  Colby, 

Herbert  D.  Foster, 
Charles  Osborne, 


NORTH  CAROLINA. 

First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  Wilmington. 
State  of  North  Carolina,  Raleigh. 

Gen.  Robert  F.  Hoke  Chapter,  United  Daugh- 
ters of  Confederacy,  Salisbury. 

State  of  North  Carolina,  Chapel  Hill. 

First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  Wilmington. 

NEW  HAMPSHIRE. 

The  National  Grange,  East  Andover. 

First  Congregational  Church,  Manchester. 
Delegate  at  Large,  Hanover. 

State  of  New  Hampshire,  Hanover. 

Friends  Sabbath  School,  North  Wear. 

NEW  YORK. 


Captain  James  M.  Andrews, 
Dr.  A.  Aaron, 

T.  H.  Bane, 

Geoffrey  Bartlett, 

Lina  Beard, 

Prof.  T.  C.  Bracy, 

William  Brodie, 

Grace  M.  Brown, 

A.  W.  Brown, 

Mary  J.  Browne, 

George  C.  Buell, 

T.  Romeyn  Bunn, 

Sarah  Burger, 

Francis  M.  Carpenter, 

Miss  C.  A.  Childs, 

Rev.  Charles  L.  Clist, 

H.  T.  Clough, 

Rev.  Chas.  M.  Collins, 

Ver  Planck  Colvin, 

Mrs.  Margaret  R.  Cox, 
Aurelia  Crane, 

Fred  T.  Cruse, 

Andrew  C.  Davis, 

Mrs.  John  Dayton, 

Rev.  Amanda  Deyo, 


City  of  Saratoga  Springs,  Saratoga  Springs. 
Temple  Beth  Zue,  Buffalo. 

Military  Academy,  West  Point. 

Military  Academy,  West  Point. 

Good  Citizenship  League,  Flushing. 

Vassar  College,  Poughkeepsie. 

Dutch  Reform,  Steinway,  L.  I. 

Shaker  Society,  Mt.  Lebanon. 

St.  Mark’s  M.  E.  Church,  Prince’s  Bay. 

Natl.  Council  Queen’s  Daughters,  Yonkers. 
City  of  Rochester,  Rochester. 

First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  Amsterdam. 
Shaker  Society,  Mt.  Lebanon. 

State  Legislature  of  New  York,  Mt.  Kisco. 
Jacob  A.  Riis  Settlement,  Great  Neck,  L.  I. 
Plattekill  Reform  Church,  Mt.  Marion. 

The  Shaker  Community,  Mt.  Lebanon. 
Reformed  Church,  Steinway,  L.  I. 

City  of  Albany,  Albany. 

First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  Albany. 

St.  James  the  Less,  Scarsdale. 

Military  Academy,  West  Point. 

City  of  Cohoes,  Cohoes. 

Woman’s  Christian  Temperance  Union,  Bay- 
side. 

Universal  Peace  Union,  Mount  Lebanon. 


William  A.  Douglas, 

Col.  E.  S.  Dudley, 

Prof.  Allen  M.  Dulles, 

Jacob  W.  Clute, 

Clyde  L.  Eastman, 

Rev.  J.  R.  Ellis, 

Miss  L.  C.  Elies, 

Irving  Elting, 

Mrs.  M.  H.  Elwell, 

Mrs.  C.  A.  G.  Fairchild, 

George  M.  Forbes, 

John  T.  Freeman, 

Robert  G.  Freeman, 

Mrs.  Alice  V.  Frost, 

George  Gearn, 

Rev.  Elmer  D.  Gildersleeve, 
J.  Fred  Goehren, 

C.  E.  Goodrich, 

William  W.  A.  Gracey, 

H.  B.  Graves, 

Mrs.  Phoebe  W.  Griffin, 

Dr.  Joseph  H.  Gunning, 
Prof.  E.  E.  Hale,  Jr., 

Charles  T.  Harris,  Jr., 

S.  B.  Hershey, 

Merwin  K.  Hart, 

W.  D.  Hildush, 

Prof.  F.  S.  Hoffman, 

John  A.  Holaburd, 

Charles  Holtzmann, 

Dr.  James  Clayton  Howard, 
Emily  Howland, 

W.  H.  Hubbard, 

William  B.  Jones, 

Mrs.  William  B.  Jones, 
Peter  F.  Keefe, 

Rev.  R.  J.  Keefe, 

John  W.  Lang, 

Rev.  H.  O.  Ladd, 

Rev.  W.  Laidlow, 

Max  Landsberg, 

Mrs.  Max  Landsberg, 

W.  T.  Langdon,  Jr., 


459 

City  of  Buffalo,  Buffalo. 

Military  Academy,  West  Point. 

Auburn  Business  Men’s  Association,  Auburn. 
City  of  Schenectady,  Schenectady. 

Military  Academy,  West  Point. 

City  of  Cohoes,  Cohoes. 

Queens-Nassau  Woman’s  Christian  Temper- 
ance Union,  Flushing. 

City  of  Poughkeepsie,  Poughkeepsie. 
Schenectady  Women’s  Club,  Schenectady. 

N.  Y.  State,  Woman’s  Christian  Temperance 
Union,  Montgomery. 

University  of  Rochester,  Rochester. 

City  of  Schenectady,  Schenectady. 

Mayor  of  Buffalo,  Buffalo. 

Woman’s  Christian  Temperance  Union,  Rich- 
mond Hill. 

Newburgh  Free  Academy,  Newburgh. 
Religious  Society  of  Friends,  Poughkeepsie. 
Spring  St.  Presbyterian  Church,  Mt.  Vernon. 
The  Moravian  Church,  Great  Kills. 

Political  Equality  Club,  Geneva. 

Board  of  Commerce,  Rochester. 
Queens-Nassau  Woman’s  Christian  Temper- 
ance Union,  Whitestone. 

St.  James  the  Less,  Scarsdale. 

Union  College,  Schenectady. 

Military  Academy,  West  Point. 

Chamber  of  Commerce,  Rochester. 

City  of  Utica,  Utica. 

Union  College,  Schenectady. 

Union  College,  Schenectady. 

Military  Academy,  West  Point. 

City  of  Schenectady,  Schenectady. 

Kingsley  Parish,  Stapleton. 

Universal  Peace  Union,  Sherwood. 

Business  Men’s  Association,  Auburn. 

Albany  Chamber  of  Commerce,  Albany. 
Albany  Academy  for  Girls,  Albany. 

Order  of  Railway  Conductors,  Rochester. 

St.  John’s  Roman  Catholic  Church,  White 
Plains. 

Military  Academy,  West  Point. 

Grace  Church,  Jamaica. 

Federation  of  Churches,  Tarrytown. 

City  of  Rochester,  Rochester. 

Congregation  Berith  Kodesh,  Rochester. 
Beekman  Hill  Meth.  Church,  Beekman  Hill. 


Robert  Lansing, 

Col.  C.  W.  Larner, 

Dr.  Albert  G.  Lawson, 

Rev.  H.  Lilienthal, 

Rev.  George  R.  Lunn, 

Rev.  J.  E.  Lyall, 

William  McCabe, 

F.  H.  McKenzie, 

Countess  Spottiswood  I 

Mackin,  j 

George  B.  Massey, 

C.  L.  Mead, 

Ann  Fitzhugh  Miller, 
Elizabeth  Smith  Miller, 
Thomas  Murphy, 

Maxwell  Murray, 

Emma  J.  Neale, 

Mrs.  C.  A.  Nearing, 

Mrs.  Wm.  I.  Onderdonk, 
John  W.  Paris, 

Rev.  John  S.  Penman, 

Harry  Pfeil, 

Kate  Putnam, 

Mrs.  Milton  Rathbun, 

Pres.  A.  V.  V.  Raymond, 

Rt.  Rev.  J.  L.  Reilly, 

Rev.  J.  B.  J.  Rhoades, 

F.  W.  Richardson, 

Daniel  Offord, 

Rev.  W.  M.  Richardson, 
George  C.  Richmond, 

Rev.  Dr.  Chas.  E.  Robinson, 
Hon.  Wm.  Cary  Sanger, 
Rev.  L.  R.  Schuyler, 

Mrs.  L.  R.  Schuyler, 

Col.  U.  S.  Scott, 

Mrs.  Ida  M.  Sherman, 
Daniel  Smiley, 

Prof.  Earl  E.  Sperry, 
Carleton  Sprague, 

Mrs.  C.  A.  Sproat, 

Mrs.  E.  C.  F.  Stephens, 
Lindley  H.  Stevens, 

Mrs.  L.  C.  Stewardson, 
Augusta  Stone, 

Frederick  E.  Storke, 


460 

City  of  Watertown,  Watertown. 

Military  Academy,  West  Point. 

Colgate  University,  Hamilton. 

St.  George’s  Church,  Astoria. 

City  of  Schenectady,  Schenectady. 

Millbrook  Reformed  Church,  South  Millbrook. 
Cigar  Makers’  International  Union,  Albany. 
Reformed  Church,  Flushing. 

Nat.  Society  Queen’s  Daughters  of  Heaven, 
Yonkers. 

City  of  Watertown,  Watertown. 

Union  College,  Schenectady. 

Political  Equality  Club,  Geneva. 

Political  Equality  Club,  Geneva. 

City  of  Buffalo,  Buffalo. 

Military  Academy,  West  Point. 

Shaker  Society,  Mt.  Lebanon. 

Woman’s  Christian  Temperance  Union,  One- 
onta. 

Indian  Association,  White  Plains. 

Business  Men’s  Association,  Flushing. 

City  of  Poughkeepsie,  Poughkeepsie. 

Military  Academy,  West  Point. 

City  of  Buffalo,  Buffalo. 

Political  Equality  League,  Port  Washington. 
Union  College,  Schenectady. 

City  of  Schenectady,  Schenectady. 

St.  Mark’s  M.  E.  Church,  Prince’s  Bay. 

City  of  Auburn,  Auburn. 

Shaker  Society,  Mt.  Lebanon. 

Fifth  Avenue  Baptist  Church,  Pocantico  Hill. 
St.  George  Episcopal  Church,  Rochester. 
Brooklyn  Public  Library,  Pelham  Manor. 

The  American  Nat’l  Red  Cross,  Sangerfield. 
United  Daughters  of  Confederacy,  Scarsdale. 
United  Daughters  of  Confederacy,  Scarsdale. 
Military  Academy,  West  Point. 

First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  Oswego. 
Lake  Mohonk  Arbitration  Conference,  Lake 
Mohonk. 

Syracuse  University,  Syracuse. 

Chamber  of  Commerce,  Buffalo. 

Political  Equality  Club,  Valley  Falls. 

Monthly  Society  of  Friends,  Poughkeepsie. 
Monthly  Society  of  Friends,  Poughkeepsie. 
Political  Equality  Club,  Geneva. 

Shaker  Society,  Mt.  Lebanon. 

City  of  Auburn,  Auburn. 


Mrs.  E.  D.  Stringham, 
Henry  H.  Swift, 

Mrs.  Mary  G.  Swift, 
Rebecca  F.  Talman, 

Col.  S.  E.  Tillman, 
Willard  O.  Trueblood, 
Rev.  F.  B.  Van  Kleeck, 
Lewis  H.  Watkins, 

Miss  L.  C.  Watson, 
Lansing  G.  Wetmore, 
Hon.  John  S.  Whalen, 
Charles  L.  Willert, 

Mrs.  Martha  C.  Willets, 

Col.  E.  E.  Wood. 

Rev.  G.  C.  Yersley, 


Mrs.  Robert  Abbe, 

Miss  E.  M.  Abrams, 
Elbridge  L.  Adams, 

May  V.  Adams, 

Dr.  John  L.  Adams, 

W.  M.  Aiken, 

W.  M.  Aikman, 

Rev.  J.  W.  Alexander, 
Rev.  John  S.  Allen, 

Mrs.  Louis  H.  Allen, 

Sadie  American, 

John  A.  Amory, 

Margaret  Anderson, 

Rev.  Wm.  F.  Anderson, 
Miss  G.  K.  B.  Andrews, 
Mrs.  Helen  J.  Andrews, 

George  E.  Armstrong, 
Fred  W.  Atkinson, 
Benjamin  M.  Asch, 
Grosvenor  Atterbury, 
Jeanette  Baird, 

Dr.  Sara  Josephine  Baker, 
Miss  G.  B.  Ballard, 

John  Bambay, 

Miss  J.  F.  Bangs, 

Moulvi  M.  Barakatullah, 
Mrs.  John  O.  Barnes, 

S.  J.  Barrows, 

Rev.  A.  E.  Barnett, 


461 

Universal  Peace  Union,  Glencove,  L.  I. 

N.  Y.  Yearly  Meeting  of  Friends,  Millbrook. 
N.  Y.  Yearly  Meeting  of  Friends,  Millbrook. 
Political  Equality  Club,  Geneva. 

Military  Academy,  West  Point. 

Friends  Church,  Poughkeepsie. 

City  of  White  Plains,  White  Plains. 

Military  Academy,  West  Point. 

City  of  Utica,  Utica. 

Chamber  of  Commerce,  Rochester. 

Secretary  of  State,  Albany. 

City  of  Buffalo,  Buffalo. 

Woman’s  Christian  Temperance  Union,  Pur- 
chase. 

Military  Academy,  West  Point. 

First  Presbyterian  Church,  Hudson. 

NEW  YORK  CITY. 

City  History  Club. 

The  Association  of  Neighborhood  Workers. 
City  Club. 

Goulding  News  Syndicate. 

New  York  School  of  Chemical  Medicine. 
American  Institute  of  Architects. 

Westminster  Presbyterian  Church,  Brooklyn. 
St.  Mark’s  M.  E.  Church. 

The  Marble  Collegiate  Church. 

Vassar  Students  Aid  Society,  N.  Y.  Branch. 
Council  of  Jewish  Women. 

North  Side  Board  of  Trade. 

Nurses’  Settlement. 

Board  of  Education  of  M.  E.  Church. 
Women’s  Philharmonic  Society. 

New  York  County  Woman’s  Christian  Tem- 
perance Union. 

The  Merchants’  Association  of  New  York. 
Polytechnic  Institute,  Brooklyn. 

Cigar  Packers’  Union. 

The  American  Institute  of  Architects. 

Portia  Club. 

College  Woman’s  Club. 

Young  Woman’s  Christian  Association. 

North  Side  Board  of  Trade. 

Young  Woman’s  Christian  Association. 
Pan-Aryan  Association. 

Colonial  Chapter  Daughters  of  the  Revolution. 
Inter-Parliamentary  Union. 

Tremont  M.  E.  Church. 


Eleanor  Bartell, 

Rev.  Miner  Lee  Bates, 
Rev.  Charles  P.  Baylis, 
Deaconess  Beard, 

David  Belais, 

Mrs.  Clark  Bell, 

Mrs.  R.  A.  Benedict, 

Mrs.  Minnie  Bemecker, 
W.  M.  H.  Birchall, 

Lillie  Devereux  Blake, 
Mrs.  Harriot  S.  Blatch, 
David  Blaustein, 

R.  A.  Theodora  Bliss, 

Dr.  Al  M.  Blossom, 

Rev.  Edward  Blews, 

Rev.  A.  Blum, 

Mr.  Blumenson, 

William  H.  Blymyer, 
Annette  Boardman, 

Prof.  M.  T.  Bogert, 

O.  N.  W.  Bohen, 

George  C.  Boldt, 

Rev.  H.  Arthur  Booker, 
C.  L.  Bordman, 

John  H.  Boschen, 

Mrs.  Kate  M.  Bostwick, 
Mors.  Louis  Boynton, 

Mrs.  P.  S.  Boynton, 

Louis  C.  Bradshaw, 

F.  C.  Breed, 

Mrs.  L.  C.  Brackett, 

Mrs.  Walter  S.  Brewster, 
Josiah  A.  Briggs, 

Mrs.  H.  M.  Brigham, 
Rev.  William  H.  Brooks, 

P.  E.  Brotherson, 

F.  Brown, 

Mrs.  William  G.  Brown, 
Rev.  Wm.  M.  Brundage, 
Mrs.  Rose  L.  Brunner, 
Dr.  George  W.  Brush, 
Mrs.  Ernest  Bunzl, 

Mrs.  Clarence  Burns, 
Rev.  Joseph  D.  Burrell, 
Bailey  Burritt, 

Dr.  Joseph  Byrn, 

Clara  Byrnes, 

Elton  Cacceani. 


462 

Normal  College. 

First  Church  of  Disciples. 

Church  of  the  Open  Door. 

Church  of  San  Salvatore. 

New  York  City  Humane  Society. 

Sorosis. 

The  Women’s  Peace  Circle. 

Normal  College  Settlement. 

North  Side  Board  of  Trade. 

New  York  Legislative  League. 

Equality  League  of  Self-Supporting  Women. 
The  Educational  Alliance. 

Delegate  at  Large. 

New  Century  Study  Circle. 

16th  St.  Free  Methodist  Church. 

Jewish  Ministers’  Association. 

University  Settlement. 

Universal  Peace  Union. 

Chinatown  Bowery  Rescue  Settlement. 
American  Chemical  Society. 

State  of  New  York. 

American  National  Red  Cross. 

St.  Paul’s  Baptist  Church. 

D.  Y.  N.  T.  House. 

Young  Men’s  Christian  Association. 

Original  Women’s  Republican  Club. 

Society  for  Political  Study. 

Women’s  Republican  Club. 

Young  Men’s  Christian  Association. 

Union  Theological  Seminary. 

Washington  Headquarters  Association. 
Brooklyn  Heights  Seminary  Club. 

North  Side  Board  of  Trade. 

Photereone  Club,  Brooklyn. 

St.  Mark’s  Methodist  Episcopal  Church. 

S.  D.  A.  Church,  Brooklyn. 

Union  Theological  Seminary. 

West  End  Women’s  Republican  Association. 
Third  Unitarian  Church,  Brooklyn. 

Political  Equality  League. 

The  Medal  of  Honor  Legion  of  United  States. 
Women’s  Republican  Club. 

Little  Mothers’  Aid  Association. 

Classon  Avenue  Presbyterian  Church. 

Speyer  School. 

The  League  of  Peace. 

Normal  College. 

Nuovo  Giornali. 


James  P.  Cohen, 

Mrs.  James  P.  Cohen, 
Julius  P.  Cohen, 

Mrs.  Julius  P.  Cohen, 

Mrs.  Mildred  M.  Caldwell, 
Dr.  Elizabeth  Cameron, 
Mrs.  E.  P.  Campbell, 
Anthony  Campagne, 
William  J.  Campbell, 
Thomas  F.  Carney, 

Mrs.  Philip  Carpenter, 

Mrs.  H.  B.  Carroll, 

Rev.  William  Carter, 

Mrs.  Robert  F.  Cartwright, 
Herbert  L.  Casson, 

Mrs.  Carrie  Chapman-Catt, 
Charles  S.  Catlin, 

J.  Lyons  Caughey, 

Rev.  James  V.  Chalmers, 
Mrs.  N.  R.  Chambliss, 

Henry  Chancellor, 

F.  R.  Chandler, 

Valentine  L.  Chandor, 

Mrs.  A.  C.  Chenoweth, 

M.  Christenson, 

Mrs.  Kate  L.  Chrystal, 

Mrs.  Frank  B.  Church, 

Rev.  John  Lewis  Clark, 
Mrs.  L.  A.  Clark, 

Walter  E.  Clark, 

Joseph  Culberton  Clayton, 
Prof.  John  U.  Cleary, 

Rev.  Dr.  Clendenin, 

Mrs.  Clendenin,' 

Fred  C.  Cocheu, 

Mrs.  Herbert  Cohn, 

Sarah  W.  Collins, 

Mrs.  L.  R.  Commander, 

F.  J.  Conrade, 

Dr.  Moncure  V.  Conway, 
James  E.  Cowles, 

Clarence  F.  Corner, 

Mrs.  Walter  W.  Court, 

Rev.  Sydney  Herbert  Cox, 
Ida  A.  Craft, 


463 

New  York  School  of  Clinical  Medicine. 

New  York  City  Mother’s  Club. 

New  York  School  of  Clinical  Medicine. 

New  York  City  Mothers’  Club. 

National  Society  of  Ohio  Women. 

Brooklyn  Public  Library  Association. 
International  Sunshine  Society,  Brooklyn. 
Church  of  San  Salvatore. 

West  Presbyterian  Church. 

Retail  Furniture  and  Carpet  Salesmen’s  Union. 
General  Federation  of  Women’s  Clubs. 
Society  for  Political  Study. 

Madison  Avenue  Reformed  Church. 

Minewa  Literary  Club. 

New  York  City  Humane  Society. 

National  American  Woman  Suffrage  Ass’n. 
Second  Unitarian  Society,  Brooklyn. 

Harlem  Presbyterian  Church. 

Church  of  Holy  Trinity. 

Stonewall  Jackson  Chapter,  United  Daughters 
of  Confederacy. 

Federation  of  Church  Clubs. 

Chicago  Real  Estate  Board. 

Woman’s  University  Club. 

Daughters  of  Holland  Dames. 

Swedish  Peace  Society. 

Professional  Woman’s  League. 

Mary  Arden  Shakespeare  Club. 

Bushwick  Congregational  Church. 

Woman’s  Christian  Temperance  Union  of 
Oswego,  Brooklyn. 

College  of  the  City  of  New  York. 

“The  American  Lawyer.” 

Fordham  University. 

St.  Peter’s  Church. 

St.  Peter’s  Church  Societies. 

Manufacturers’  Association  of  New  York. 
College  of  the  City  of  New  York. 

Westchester  County  Woman’s  Christian  Tem- 
perance Union. 

Equality  League  of  Self-Supporting  Women. 
Health  Culture  Club. 

Dickinson  College. 

Postal  Progress  League. 

Summerfield  M.  E.  Church  and  Bible  Club. 
Original  Women’s  Rep.  Club,  Brooklyn. 
Bethany  Congregation. 

Woman’s  Christian  Temperance  Union. 


Mrs.  Chas.  O.  H.  Craigie, 
Mrs.  Fred  Crane, 

J.  S.  Dailey, 

Rabbi  David  Davidson, 
Gertrude  Day, 

Mrs.  Mary  I.  DeGroff, 
Mrs.  W.  G.  Demerest, 
Rev.  John  B.  Devins, 

Rev.  H.  P.  Dewey, 
Walter  T.  Diack, 

William  D.  Dickey, 
William  J.  Dilthey, 
Samuel  J.  Dike, 

Prof.  Edward  T.  Divine, 
Cleveland  H.  Dodge, 

Miss  E.  Doheny, 

Rev.  G.  Donaldson, 
Marion  B.  Doolittle, 
Anna  Doughty, 

William  Harris  Douglas, 
Theodore  F.  Douglass, 
Miss  M.  F.  Doyen, 

Julia  H.  Doyle, 

Mrs.  William  K.  Draper, 
Mary  E.  Dreier, 

Stephen  D.  Duggan, 

Mrs.  Charles  Duggin, 
Victor  H.  Duras, 

Rev.  Caleb  S.  S.  Dutton, 
George  L.  Duval, 

Mrs.  G.  W.  Eastburn, 
Viola  Eckstein, 

Mrs.  B.  Elling, 

Brother  Edward, 

Andrew  W.  Edson, 

Rabbi  Aaron  Eiseman, 
Lou  Elwell, 

Herman  Epstein, 

Rev.  A.  H.  Evans, 

Rev.  John  G.  Fagg, 

C.  P.  Fagnani, 

Harvey  M.  Ferris, 

H.  Falvey, 

Arthur  B.  Farquhar, 

J.  A.  Farrell, 

P.  F.  Farrell, 


464 

Brooklyn  Public  Library  Association. 
Consumers’  League  of  City  of  New  York. 
Church  of  Jesus  Christ,  Latter  Day  Saints. 
Congregational  Agndath  Jeshorin. 

College  Settlement. 

First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  S.  I. 

Society  for  Political  Study. 

Presbyterian  Church  of  New  York. 

Church  of  the  Pilgrims,  Brooklyn. 

West  Side  Branch  Young  Men’s  Christian 
Association. 

Maritime  Association  of  Port  of  New  York. 
Calvary  English  Lutheran  Church. 

First  Moravian  Church. 

American  Academy  Political  & Social  Science. 
American  National  Red  Cross. 

Young  Woman’s  Christian  Association. 
Delegate  at  Large. 

Greenport  Settlement,  Brooklyn. 

Mary  Arden  Shakespeare  Club. 

New  York  Produce  Exchange. 

Typographical  Union. 

Asacog  Settlement. 

Evening  School  No.  67. 

American  National  Red  Cross. 

Women’s  Trade  Union.  League,  Brooklyn. 
College  of  the  City  of  New  York. 

Church  of  New  Jerusalem. 

Bohemian  Literary  Society. 

Second  Unitarian  Society,  Brooklyn. 
Merchants’  Association  of  New  York. 

Long  Acre  League. 

Clara  De  Hirsch  Home  for  Working  Girls. 
Rutgers  League. 

Manhattan  College. 

Delegate  at  Large. 

72d  Street  Synagogue. 

Business  Women’s  League. 

People’s  Institute  Club. 

West  Presbyterian  Church. 

Middle  Collegiate  Church. 

New  York  Peace  Society. 

First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  Brooklyn. 
American  Brotherhood  of  Cement  Workers. 
National  Association  of  Manufacturers. 
College  of  the  City  of  New  York. 

The  International  Association  of  Bridge  and 
Structural  Iron  Workers. 


Amy  Fay, 

Henry  Feldman, 

J.  G.  D.  Ferguson, 

Mrs.  S.  J.  Fischer, 

Dr.  Edward  Fisher, 

Rev.  M.  J.  Flynn, 

Otto  G.  Foelker, 

J.  M.  Ford, 

Mrs.  L.  Fort, 

Edith  W.  Fosdick, 

J.  N.  Francolini, 

Mrs.  A.  E.  Fraser, 

Rev.  Chas.  E.  Furman, 
Mrs.  Nellie  E.  C.  Furmen, 
Michael  Furst, 

Mrs.  Royal  W.  Gage, 
Elizabeth  Gaines, 

Eleanor  Gay, 

James  Gear, 

Edward  G.  Gerstle, 
William  H.  Gibson, 
Franklin  H.  Giddings, 
Mrs.  Alice  W.  Gifford, 
Mrs.  Nathan  Glauber, 
Mrs.  Eleanor  B.  Glogan, 
Rev.  Israel  Goldfarb, 
Henry  M.  Goldfogle, 

I E.  Goldwasser, 

David  Golieb, 

Mrs.  Marion  Goldman, 
Mrs.  Chas.  Goldsborough, 

Mrs.  Mary  H.  Gomes, 
Mrs.  J.  R.  Gomez, 

Gen.  J.  Adelphi  Gottlieb, 
Mrs.  E.  Grannis, 

Prof.  Charles  A.  Green, 
Charles  A.  Green, 
Elizabeth  W.  Greenwood, 

Rev.  David  B.  Griffiths, 
Mrs.  R.  Grossman, 

Rev.  Dr.  R.  Grossman, 

S.  M.  Guerin, 

Mrs.  J.  R.  Guernsey, 

Mrs.  Louis  Guttman, 
Helen  M.  Hall, 

James  H.  Hamilton, 


465 

Women’s  Philharmonic  Society. 
German-American  Peace  Society. 

The  Union  Settlement. 

Young  Women’s  Christian  Association. 
Medical  Association  for  Prevention  of  War. 
Federation  Societies  of  South  Brooklyn. 

State  Legislature  of  New  York,  Brooklyn. 
Church  of  Jesus  Christ,  Latter  Day  Saints. 
Business  Women’s  League. 

Normal  College  Alumni  House. 

Italian  Chamber  of  Commerce. 

Women’s  Health  Protective  Ass’n,  Brooklyn, 
Church  of  the  Open  Door,  Brooklyn. 
International  Sunshine  Society,  Brooklyn. 
Temple  Israel  of  Brooklyn. 

Chiropean  Club,  Brooklyn. 

Adelphi  College,  Brooklyn. 

Barnard  College. 

Church  of  Epiphany. 

Emanuel  Brotherhood. 

Board  of  Trade  and  Transportation. 

New  York  Peace  Society. 

Rainy  Day  Club. 

Council  of  Jewish  Women. 

Portia  Club. 

Congregation  Beth  Israel,  Brooklyn. 
Legislative  Committee. 

Sunday  School  Teachers’  Association. 

Hartley  House. 

Recreation  Rooms  and  Settlement. 

New  York  Chapter  United  Daughters  of 
Confederacy. 

Brooklyn  Women’s  Suffrage  Ass’n,  Brooklyn. 
Happy  Hour  Club. 

National  Vol.  Emergency  Service  Med.  Corps. 
National  League  for  the  Promotion  of  Purity. 
Polytechnic  Institute,  Brooklyn. 

American  Seamen’s  Friend  Society. 

Woman’s  Christian  Temperance  Union  of 
Brooklyn. 

Edgehill  Church,  Spuyten  Duyvil. 

Temple  Rodeph  Sholom. 

New  York  Board  of  Jewish  Ministers. 

United  Brothers  of  Carpenters. 

Young  Woman’s  Christian  Association. 

Vassar  Student’s  Aid  Society. 

Riverside  Association. 

University  Settlement. 


30 


Mrs.  Edward  P.  Hampson, 
Alice  Fisher  Harcourt, 
Rev.  Frank  P.  Harris. 

M.  H.  Harris, 

Mrs.  Maurice  Harris, 
Richard  Hartley, 

Mrs.  Richard  Hartley, 
Siegfried  Hartman, 

Rev.  L.  A.  Harvey, 

Mrs.  L.  A.  Harvey, 

Mrs.  Harry  Hastings, 
Edwin  F.  Hatfield, 

F.  Hauschild, 

Mary  G.  Hay, 

Daniel  P.  Hays, 

Mrs.  Daniel  P.  Hays, 

Mrs.  Henry  M.  Heath, 

Rev.  H.  H.  Heck, 

J.  Heinsoth, 

Mrs.  Frances  Heilman, 
Mrs.  A.  B.  Hepburn, 

Dr.  Hervey, 

Rev.  St.  Clair  Hester, 

Rev.  W.  H.  Hethrick, 

Hon.  Warren  Higley, 

Mrs.  Warren  J.  Higley, 
Matthew  Hinman, 

Mrs.  Bella  Hirsch, 

Prof.  Frederick  Hirth, 

P.  L.  Hoen, 

William  B.  Hogan, 

August  Holbermann, 

Mrs.  Cornelia  A.  Hollub, 
Dr.  Holm, 

Rev.  John  Haynes  Holmes, 
Mrs.  Franklin  W.  Hooper, 
Mrs.  Dunlap  Hopkins, 

Rev.  H.  M.  Hopkins, 

Mrs.  Wm.  H.  Hotchkin, 
Mrs.  Louis  S.  Houghton, 
Lolabell  House, 

Mrs.  George  Howes, 

Nellie  L.  Howes, 

Mrs.  Isaac  Howland, 

Eva  M.  Hubbard, 

William  N.  Hubbell, 
Charles  Hulihan, 


466 

Women’s  Suffrage  Association,  Brooklyn. 

The  Twelfth  Night  Club. 

M.  E.  Church,  44th  Street. 

Temple  Israel. 

Temple  Israel  Sisterhood  . 

Hope  Baptist  Church. 

Hope  Baptist  Church. 

College  of  the  City  of  New  York. 

Fourth  Unitarian  Church. 

Fourth  Unitarian  Church. 

Women’s  Peace  Circle. 

First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist. 

First  German  M.  E.  Church. 

Women’s  Press  Club. 

Temple  Israel  of  Harlem. 

Local  School  Board  of  19th  District. 

Kosmos  Club,  Brooklyn. 

First  German  M.  E.  Church. 

Young  Men’s  Christian  Association. 

Women’s  Conference  Ethical  Culture  Society. 
City  History  Club. 

Delegate  at  Large. 

Church  of  the  Messiah,  Brooklyn. 

Calvary  English  Lutheran  Church,  Brooklyn. 
National  Society  Sons  American  Revolution. 
Woman’s  Press  Club. 

Order  of  Founders  and  Patriots  of  America. 
Society  of  Ethical  Culture. 

Delegate  at  Large. 

Seventh  Day  Adventist,  Brooklyn. 

Speyer  School. 

Peace  and  Harmony  Com.  of  One  Hundred. 
Women’s  Peace  Circle. 

Business  Women’s  League. 

Church  of  Messiah,  Unitarian. 

Unity  Church,  Brooklyn. 

School  of  Applied  Design. 

Church  of  the  Holy  Nativity. 

Colonial  Chapter  Daughters  of  the  Revolution. 
Woman’s  Christian  Temperance  Union. 

Park  Side  Presbyterian  Church,  Brooklyn. 
Rutgers  League. 

Professional  Women’s  League. 

Women’s  Health  Protective  Association. 
Rutgers  League. 

Judson  Memorial  Church. 

Pattern  Makers’  League,  N.  A. 


Rev.  H.  S.  Hull, 

Rev.  W,  B.  Humphrey, 
Mrs.  M.  E.  I.  Humphrey, 
Rev.  G.  McP.  Hunter, 

J.  W.  Hutchinson, 

Miss  Irwin, 

Anna  M.  Jackson, 
George  M.  Jackson, 

A.  Jacobi, 

F.  L.  Janewey, 

George  H.  Janeway, 
George  W.  Johnson, 
Robert  U.  Johnson, 

Mrs.  J.  H.  Johnston, 

Mrs.  Francis  B.  Jones, 
Mrs.  R.  W.  Jones, 

S.  L.  Joshi, 

George  Kahut, 

Jacob  Kenzler, 

Fred  W.  Keasley, 

Garry  Kelly, 

Mrs.  Clara  C.  Kennedy, 
Rev.  W.  H.  Kepliant, 
Frank  Kevlin, 

Mrs.  Mary  S.  Kimber, 
Rev.  A.  Arthur  King, 
Mrs.  A.  Arthur  King 
Mrs.  Francis  Kinnicutt, 
Dr.  S.  A.  Knopf, 

Mrs.  C.  C.  Knowlton, 

R.  C.  King, 

Rabbi  Mayer  Kopstein, 
Rev.  M.  Kranskopf, 

Mrs.  Samuel  Kubie, 
Hermann  C.  Kudlick, 
Nathaniel  Laird, 

Charles  W.  Lawrence, 

Mrs.  Chas.  W.  Lawrence, 
Dr.  A.  G.  Lawson, 

P.  T.  Lazarus, 

Dr.  A.  L.  Ledoux, 

A.  Lenalie, 

Nathaniel  H.  Levi, 

Mrs.  Arthur  S.  Levy, 

Ivey  W.  Lewis, 


467 

Grace  M.  P.  Church. 

Mayflower  Society  of  New  York. 

Mayflower  Society  of  New  York. 

American  Seamen’s  Friend  Society. 

Society  of  Friends. 

Gospel  Settlement  League. 

Religious  Society  of  Friends. 

Typographical  Union. 

American  Medical  Association. 

Union  Theological  Seminary. 

New  York  Produce  Exchange. 

Federation  of  Churches,  Brooklyn. 

Century  Magazine. 

The  Little  Mothers’  Aid  Association. 
Washington  Headquarters  Association. 

New  York  Chapter  United  Daughters  of 
Confederacy. 

Pan-Aryan  Association. 

Society  for  Religious  Culture. 

Columbia  University. 

“The  American  Lawyer.” 

Int.  Ass’n  of  Bridge  and  Structural  Iron 
Workers. 

Rutgers  Alumni  Association. 

North  Side  Board  of  Trade. 

Greenwich  House  Settlement. 

Indian  Association. 

Emanual  Lutheran  Church. 

Emanual  Lutheran  Church. 

Barnard  College. 

Church  of  Messiah. 

New  York  League  of  Unitarian  Women. 
Union  Theological  Seminary. 

Temple  Adath  Israel. 

Atereth  Israel. 

Council  of  Jewish  Women. 

German-American  Peace  Society. 

St.  Nicholas  Presbyterian  Church. 

New  York  Monthly  Meeting  Religious  Society 
of  Friends.  r 

Friends’  Christian  Endeavor  Society. 

Judson  Memorial  Church. 

Retail  Furniture  and  Carpet  Salesmen’s  Union. 
American  Institute  of  Mining  Engineers. 
People’s  Symphony  Concerts. 

Broadway  Board  of  Trade,  Brooklyn. 
National  Jewish  Women’s  Council. 

Plymouth  Church,  Brooklyn. 


Rev.  F.  A.  Licht, 

E.  M.  Lindley, 

Rev.  Stephen  A.  Lloyd, 

Rev.  John  D.  Long, 

Edward  H.  Loud, 

C.  E.  Lounsbery, 

Rev.  Edward  Loux, 

Mrs.  Edward  Loux, 

Rev.  R.  D.  Lord, 

Mrs.  J.  de  la  Mu  Lozier, 
Rev.  Henry  Lubeck, 

M.  W.  Ludden, 

Mrs.  Frank  M.  Lupton, 
Emma  Lutzius, 

James  M.  Lynch, 

Julia  G.  McAllister, 

Silas  McBee, 

John  F.  McCabe, 

William  McCarroll, 

John  J.  McCook, 

Miss  McClure, 

N.  H.  McCord, 

J.  Crawford  McCreery, 
Sarah  W.  McDannold, 
Walter  McDougall, 

Mrs.  Harriet  C.  McDowell, 
William  O.  McDowell, 
Mrs.  C.  M.  McEvoy, 

Rev.  W.  H.  McGlanflin, 
Rev.  Wallace  MacMullen, 
Mrs.  Wallace  MacMullen, 
Lieut.  Collin  A.  McLeod, 
Mrs.  John  S.  McKay, 

Mrs.  Alex.  McNaughton, 
Mrs.  Howard  McNutt, 
Henry  M.  MacCracken, 
Edward  H.  Magill, 

Mrs.  Edward  H.  Magill, 

N.  P.  Nahon, 

Mrs.  William  R.  Malone, 
M.  Mandl, 

William  A.  Marble, 

Egisto  Mariani, 

Harry  Markowitz, 

Helen  Marot, 

Mrs.  Emilee  S.  Martin, 
John  C.  Martin, 

Ellen  S.  Marvin, 


468 

First  German  Baptist  Church. 

League  of  American  Pen  Women. 

Church  of  the  Evangel,  Brooklyn. 

Park  Side  Church,  Brooklyn. 

Maritime  Exchange,  Brooklyn. 

Women’s  Health  Protective  Ass’n,  Flatbush. 
Madison  Avenue  Baptist  Church. 

Madison  Avenue  Baptist  Church. 

Inter-Church  Conference,  Brooklyn. 

Rutgers  Female  College  and  Inst.,  Brooklyn. 
Zion  and  St.  Timothy  Church. 

Gospel  Settlement  League. 

Kosmos  Club,  Brooklyn. 

Normal  College. 

International  Typographical  Union. 

Colonial  Dames  of  America. 

“The  Churchman.” 

Typographical  Union. 

N.  Y.  Board  of  Trade  and  Transportation. 
New  York  Peace  Society. 

West  Side  Neighborhood  House. 

The  Merchants’  Association  of  New  York. 
The  Merchants’  Association  of  New  York. 
Women’s  Press  Club. 

Bedford  Presbyterian  Church,  Brooklyn. 
Young  Friends’  Association. 

The  League  of  Peace. 

Young  Woman’s  Christian  Association. 
Church  of  Eternal  Hope. 

Madison  Avenue  M.  E.  Church. 

Madison  Avenue  Mu  E.  Church. 

National  Vol.  Emergency  Service  Med.  Corps. 
Women’s  Club,  Brooklyn. 

Knickerbocker  Relief  Club. 

Minerva  Literary  Club,  Brooklyn. 

New  York  University. 

Universal  Peace  Union. 

Universal  Peace  Union. 

Amalgamated  Carpenters. 

National  Society  of  Ohio  Women. 
Immigration  Society — France. 

The  Merchants  Association  of  New  York. 
Italian  Chamber  of  Commerce. 

College  Settlement. 

Women’s  Trade  Union  League. 

National  Women’s  Press  Club. 

J.  C.  Martin  Educational  Fund. 

The  Union  Settlement. 


C.  C.  Mathews, 

Dr.  Bertha  Lubertz, 

Mrs.  James  Matthews, 
Charles  M.  Maxwell, 

Rev.  B.  Mehrkens, 
Mansfield  Merriman, 
Henry  Metzner, 

Rev.  M.  A.  Meyer, 
Theodore  Meyer, 

Mrs.  H.  Meyers, 

Rev.  I.  B.  Michaelson, 

J.  de  la  Montague, 

Samuel  Morris, 

Dr.  W.  James  Morton, 

Levi  P.  Morton, 

Frank  Moss, 

James  J.  Murphy, 

William  Nason, 

Mrs.  Simeon  H.  Newhouse 
Marguerite  Newland, 
Augustus  S.  Newman, 

Mrs.  Benjamin  Niccol, 
Ludwig  Nissen, 

Mrs.  John  L.  Niver, 

Mrs.  Louis  Nixon, 

Miss  I.  Nordlinger, 

Delle  Fay  Norris, 

Thomas  O’Brien, 

P.  J.  O’Connell, 

E.  E.  Olcott, 

Mrs.  Henry  Ollesheimer, 
Mrs.  Frank  S.  Osborn, 

Mrs.  Homer  I.  Ostrom, 
Rev.  W.  F.  Ottarson, 
George  H.  Owen, 

Thomas  Paine, 

Erastus  Palmer, 

Mrs.  James  H.  Parker, 

Mrs.  Harry  Parsons, 
Henry  E.  Payne, 

Rev.  W.  J.  Peck, 

Hedley  Pedlar, 

Edward  W.  Peet, 

Rev.  D.  L.  Pelton, 

Rev.  I.  de  la  Penha, 


469 

Pilgrim  Church. 

Chrystie  Street  Settlement  Rooms. 

Original  Women’s  Rep.  Club,  Brooklyn. 
Typographical  Union. 

Emanuel  Lutheran  Church. 

Lehigh  University. 

North  American  Gymnastic  Union. 

Temple  Israel,  Brooklyn. 

German- American  Peace  Society. 

Council  of  Jewish  Women. 

Banai  Sholaum,  Brooklyn. 

National  Society  Sons  American  Revolution. 
Henry  Street  Settlement. 

Medical  Assn,  for  Prevention  of  War. 
Chamber  of  Commerce. 

Natl.  Christian  League  for  the  Promotion  of 
Purity. 

Typographical  Union. 

Marble  Cutters’  Association. 

Mary  Arden  Shakespeare  Club. 

Barnard  College. 

Young  Men’s  Christian  Association. 
Consumers’  League  of  New  York. 

Board  of  Trade  and  Transportation,  Brooklyn. 
Century  Theatre  Club. 

Daughters  American  Revolution. 

The  Portia  Club. 

N.  Y.  City  Vassar  Students’  Aid  Society. 
Nurses  Settlement. 

Typographical  Union  No.  6. 

American  Institute  of  Mining  Engineers. 

N.  Y.  Association  of  Working  Girls. 

Century  Theatre  Club. 

Sorosis. 

New  York  Presbytery. 

The  Navy  League  of  the  United  States. 

Pilgrim  Congregational  Church,  Richmond 
Hill. 

College  of  the  City  of  New  York. 

N.  Y.  Chapter  United  Daughters  of  tht  Con- 
federacy. 

International  Children’s  School  Farm  League. 
Polytechnic  Institute,  Brooklyn. 

Union  Church,  Corona,  L.  I. 

16th  Street  Methodist  Church,  Brooklyn. 
Broadway  Tabernacle  Church. 

St.  James  Episcopal  Church. 

Spanish  and  Portugese  Congregation. 


Mary  J.  Pierson, 

Josephene  Pomerene, 

Mrs.  William  H.  Porter, 
Brother  Potamian, 

Emma  T.  Pretlow, 

Robert  E.  Pretlow, 
Leopold  Prince, 

Ruth  Price, 

Dr.  Henry  S.  Pritchett, 
Cornelius  A.  Pugsley, 
Josiah  C.  Pumpelly, 
Edward  B.  Rawson, 
Margaret  H.  Read, 

Mrs.  C.  G.  Reed, 

William  Ap  Rees, 

L.  O.  Reeve, 

Rev.  J.  B.  Remensynder, 
Rev.  A.  H.  Rennie, 

Katherine  T.  Rhodes, 

Rev.  L.  C.  Rich, 

Charles  E.  Ried, 

Julia  F.  Ring, 

John  L.  Roberts, 

Mrs.  Rosalind  Roberts, 
Hon.  Beverly  R.  Robinson, 
Mrs.  Cornelia  S.  Robinson, 
Wm.  S.  Robinson, 

J.  Ella  Rood, 

Jennie  Rose, 

Isaac  F.  Russell, 

Hon.  Ezra  Rust, 

Michael  Salit, 

L.  W.  Sanders, 

Rev.  Dr.  E.  B.  Sanford, 
Florence  M.  Scales, 

Rev.  Henry  P.  Schauffler, 
Mrs.  S.  B.  Schenck, 

Mrs.  Ida  J.  Schepmoes, 
Carl  Schlegel, 

Helen  Schlondorof, 

Rose  Schneiderman, 
Hyman  Schroeder, 

Mrs.  N.  J.  Schwerin, 

Mrs.  W.  S.  Searle, 
Seymour  N.  Sears, 

Martha  I.  Shaw, 


470 

Peoples’  Institute. 

College  Women’s  Club. 

New  York  City  Mothers’  Club. 

Manhattan  College. 

Friends  Church,  Brooklyn. 

Broadway  Friends  Church. 

Legislature  of  New  York. 

Chinatown  Bowery  Settlement  for  Girls. 
Carnegie  Foundation. 

Sons  of  American  Revolution. 

The  League  of  Peace. 

Religious  Society  of  Friends,  Brooklyn. 
Women’s  Philharmonic  Society. 

Colonial  Dames  of  America. 

Welsh  Presbyterian  Church. 

First  Free  Baptist  Church,  Brooklyn. 
Lutheran  Church. 

The  Glenmore  Avenue  Presbyterian  Church, 
Brooklyn. 

International  Children’s  School  Farm  League. 
Corpus  Christi  Church. 

The  North  Side  Board  of  Trade. 

Chiropean  Club,  Brooklyn. 

Fifth  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist. 

Fifth  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist. 

State  of  New  York. 

West  End  Republican  Club. 

Third  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  Brooklyn. 
Knickerbocker  Relief  Club. 

The  Welcome  House  Settlement. 

American.  Social  Science  Association. 

Saginaw  Board  of  Trade. 

Congregation  Beth  Israel. 

Young  Men’s  Bible  Class,  Fifth  Avenue  Bap- 
tist Church. 

Inter-Church  Conference. 

West  Side  Neighborhood  House. 

Olivet  Memorial  Church. 

Women’s  Republican  Association. 

First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  Brooklyn. 
Swedish  Peace  Society. 

Normal  College. 

Equality  League  of  Self-Supporting  Women. 
Henry  Street  Settlement. 

The  Bloomingdale  Guild. 

Moravian  Church,  Brooklyn. 

Church  of  the  Evangel,  Brooklyn. 

The  Bloomingdale  Guild. 


Edwin  R.  A.  Seligman, 

El  son  W.  Sheffield, 

Waldo  H.  Sherman, 

Mrs.  Waldo  H.  Sherman, 
Rev.  Joseph  Silverman, 
Mrs.  Mary  K.  Sinckovitch, 
Mrs.  Frederick  Smart, 

G.  Waldo  Smith, 

Mrs.  M.  Wright  Smith, 
Rev.  Thomas  W.  Smith, 
Mrs.  L.  McKee  Smith, 

Mrs.  Henry  Smith, 

Mrs.  Hannah  P.  Smith, 
Maurice  F.  Smith, 

Rev.  George  E.  Smith, 

Dr.  Wm.  Benham  Snow, 
Miss  Sommerfeld, 

J.  S.  Sprague, 

Mrs.  E.  L.  Stanley, 

Achille  Starace, 

Mrs.  Marie  Starch, 

Laura  A.  Steel, 

John  A.  Stercher, 

Mrs.  Leo  Stein, 

J.  M.  Steinberg, 

Benjamin  F.  Stephens, 
Clinton  Stephens, 

O.  J.  Stephens, 

Mrs.  Augusta  E.  Stetson, 
W.  C.  Stinson, 

Franklin  N.  Stote, 

Mrs.  Eliza  Streicher, 
Solomon  Sulzberger, 
Estella  Sweet, 

Rev.  C.  M.  Tallifson, 

Fred  E.  Tasker, 

Mrs.  Edward  Tatum', 

Rev.  DeWitt  B.  Thompson, 
Mrs.  Mary  D.  Thomas, 

Mrs.  Edward  Thorndike, 
Rev.  Dr.  Maurice  Thorner, 
Emma  Thursby, 

John  B.  Tillotson, 

Mrs.  Helen  B.  Tillotson, 
Pacelli  Tito, 


471 

American  Economic  Association. 

Young  Men’s  Christian  Association. 

American  League  Citizenship  Training. 
American  League  Citizenship  Training. 
Temple  Emanu-El. 

Greenwich  House  Settlement. 

Good  Citizenship  League,  Flushing. 

N.  Y.  Board  of  Trade  and  Transportation, 
Bayside. 

Women’s  Republican  Club. 

St.  Nicholas  Presbyterian  Church. 

The  Women’s  Club  of  Staten  Island,  Brighton. 
College  Women’s  Club. 

Universal  Peace  Union. 

American  Federation  of  Musicians. 

Methodist  Protestant  Church,  Aqueduct,  L.  I. 
Medical  Association  for  Prevention  of  War. 
Clara  De  Hirsch  Home,  for  Working  Girls. 
Fordham  M.  E.  Church. 

State  Republican  Club. 

Italian  Chamber  of  Commerce. 

Riverside  Girls’  Club. 

Greenpoint  Settlement,  Brooklyn. 

Leslie’s  Weekly. 

Philanthropic  Committee  Women’s  Confer- 
ence. 

Congregation  of  B’nai  Scholoum. 

The  Brooklyn  Public  Library  Ass’n,  Brooklyn. 
The  North  Side  Board  of  Trade. 

The  North  Side  Board  of  Trade. 

First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist. 

Dutch  Reformed  Church. 

System  Magazine. 

Hartley  House. 

Temple  Bethel. 

The  League  of  Peace,  Brooklyn. 

Norwegian  Lutheran  Church,  Brooklyn. 

West  Side  Young  Men’s  Christian  Association. 
Religious  Society  of  Friends. 

Park  Avenue  Methodist  Episcopal  Church. 
New  York  County  Woman’s  Christian  Tem- 
perance Union. 

Jacob  A.  Riis  Settlement. 

Temple  Hand-in-Hand. 

Little  Mothers  Society. 

First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  S.  I. 
Daughters  of  American  Revolution. 

Rockmen’s  and  Excavators’  Union. 


Raphael  Tobias, 

Rev.  E.  C.  Tollifson, 

Rev.  William  B.  Tower, 
George  E.  Townley, 

Rev.  H.  A.  Tupper, 

Emily  L.  Tuckerman, 
Charles  Unangest, 

Charles  W.  Underhill, 

Mrs.  Van  Beil, 

Mrs.  S.  C.  Van  Dusen, 

Mrs.  H.  Van  Sinderen, 

M.  J.  Verdery, 

W.  G.  Ver  Planck, 

Oswald  G.  Villard, 

Mrs.  Henry  Villard, 

John  A.  Voris, 

John  A.  Wallace,  Jr., 

Mrs.  G.  B.  Wallis, 

Mrs.  William  C.  Walter, 
George  A.  Walton, 

Mrs.  Leopold  Wallach, 
James  K.  Warnock, 

Miss  Waters, 

Mrs.  R.  P.  S.  Webster, 

Mrs.  Robert  Weil, 

Paul  G.  Weitz, 

Mrs.  Ida  Wells, 

Rev.  H.  Leraia  Wender, 
Mrs.  J.  Wells  Wentworth, 
Miss  K.  Westendorf, 

Mrs.  Susanne  L.  Westfield, 
Amoret  T.  Wetmore, 

G.  M.  Whicher, 

Horace  White, 

Rev.  J.  S.  White, 

S.  V.  White, 

James  Wiggins, 

Mrs.  Charlotte  B.  Wilbour, 
Mabel  Wilcox, 

Laura  G.  Williams, 

Martha  McC.  Williams, 
Rev.  Thomas  Williams, 

W.  R.  Wilson, 

Mrs.  H.  J.  Wood, 


472 

Sons  of  Veterans. 

Bethlehem  Norwegian  Lutheran  Church, 
Brooklyn. 

Fordham  M.  E.  Church,  Fordham. 

Church  of  the  Redeemer,  Brooklyn. 

15th  Street  Baptist  Church,  Brooklyn. 
International  Children’s  School  Farm  League. 
St.  James  Lutheran  Church. 

Religious  Society  of  Friends,  Brooklyn. 

Little  Mothers’  Aid  Association. 

City  History  Club. 

International  Children’s  School  Farm  League. 
Reformed  Church  of  Flushing,  Flushing. 
Geneva  Political  Equality  Club. 

New  York  City  Peace  Society. 

New  York  State  Suffrage  Association. 

Young  Men’s  Christian  Association. 
Summerfield  M.  E.  Church,  Brooklyn. 

Colonial  Chapter  Daughters  of  Revolution, 
Brooklyn. 

The  Post  Parliament,  New  Brighton. 

General  Conference  of  Friends. 

Council  of  Jewish  Women. 

West  End  Presbyterian  Church. 

Henry  Street  Settlement. 

N.  Y.  League  of  Unitarian  Women,  Brooklyn. 
Council  of  Jewish  Women. 

Young  Men’s  Christian  Association,  Second 
Avenue  Branch. 

Professional  Women’s  League. 

The  Spanish  and  Portuguese  Congregation. 
Business  Women’s  League. 

D.  Y.  N.  T.  House. 

Professional  Women’s  League. 

West  Side  Neighborhood  House. 

Normal  College,  New  York. 

New  York  Peace  Society. 

The  Neighborhood  Workers’  Ass’n  of  N.  Y. 
Marcus  Monument,  Ass’n,  Brooklyn. 

Madison  Avenue  Reformed  Church. 

Phalo  Club. 

School  of  Philanthropy. 

Postal  Progress  League. 

Tennessee  Women’s  & Authors’  Press  Club. 
Pilgrim  Congregational  Church,  Richmond 
Hill. 

Grace  M.  P.  Church. 

Portia  Club. 


Mrs.  W.  H.  Wood, 
Harry  Woodward, 

Dr.  Charles  Wooley, 
Mrs.  M.  P.  Woolcott, 
Rev.  W.  S.  Woolworth, 
Mrs.  W.  S.  Woolworth, 
Mrs.  Wright, 

Mrs.  John  Yarrogen, 
Mrs.  James  Yereance, 
Mrs.  J.  Zimmerman, 
Antonia  Zucca, 


George  H.  Bradford, 
Lucy  Gage, 


Mrs.  S.  A.  Anderson, 

Rev.  David  Wasgatt  Clark, 
Rev.  H.  H.  Clark, 

J.  G.  W.  Cowles, 

C.  W.  Dabney, 

Ella  M.  Haas, 

Ida  M.  Haas, 

T.  H.  Haines, 

Dr.  Thomas  P.  Hart, 
William  Christie  Herron, 
Mrs.  Wm.  Christie  Herron, 
Hon.  John  D.  Higgins, 
Edna  Hopkins, 

Charles  S.  Howe, 

Dr.  Wm.  G.  Hubbard, 

J.  A.  Jeffrey, 

Hon.  E.  A.  Jones, 

W.  A.  Mahony, 

P.  V.  N.  Myers, 

Mrs.  J.  Peterson, 

Supt.  R.  E.  Rayman, 

J.  A.  Shawan, 

O.  A.  Simpson, 

Andrew  Squire, 

Mrs.  Andrew  Squire, 

J.  W.  Van  Kirk, 

Joe  N.  Weber, 

Rev.  E.  Melville  Wylie, 


473 

Business  Women’s  League. 

Plymouth  Church  of  Brooklyn,  Brooklyn. 

The  Nat’l  Christian  League,  Brooklyn. 

Third  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  Brooklyn. 
Clinton  Ave.  Congregational  Church,  Brooklyn. 
Clinton  Ave.  Congregational  Church,  Brooklyn. 
Asacog  Settlement,  Brooklyn. 

City  Federation  of  Women’s  Clubs. 

League  of  Peace. 

Long  Acre  League. 

Italian  Chamber  of  Commerce. 

OKLAHOMA. 

Epworth  University,  Oklahoma  City. 

Epworth  University,  Oklahoma  City. 

OHIO. 

Civic  Club,  Akron. 

Cincinnati  Peace  Society,  Cincinnati. 

City  of  Salem,  Salem. 

Chamber  of  Commerce,  Cleveland. 

Arbitration  and  Peace  Society,  Cincinnati. 
Women’s  Century  Club,  Dayton. 

Women’s  Century  Club,  Dayton. 

Ohio  State  University,  Columbus. 

City  of  Cincinnati,  Cincinnati. 

City  of  Cincinnati,  Cincinnati. 

Cincinnati  Women’s  Club,  Cincinnati. 

City  of  Salem,  Salem. 

Friends  General  Conference,  Cincinnati. 

Case  School  Applied  Science,  Cleveland. 
American  Peace  Society,  Columbus. 

Board  of  Trade,  Columbus. 

Board  of  Trade,  Columbus. 

Board  of  Trade,  Columbus. 

Arbitration  and  Peace  Society,  Cincinnati. 
Civic  Club,  Akron. 

Ohio  Supt.  of  Schools,  East  Liverpool. 

Board  of  Trade,  Columbus. 

City  of  Salem,  Salem. 

Ohio  State  Bar  Association,  Cleveland. 

Ohio  State  Bar  Association,  Cleveland. 

City  of  Mt.  Vernon,  N.  Y.,  Youngstown. 
American  Federation  of  Musicians,  Cincinnati. 
Presbyterian  Minister’s  Club,  Cleveland. 


Mrs.  A.  H.  Allen, 

Rev.  Matthew  Anderson, 
Rev.  A.  S.  Anspacher, 
Joshua  L.  Baily, 

Rev.  H.  H.  Barber, 

Frances  E.  Baright, 
Congressman  A.  L.  Bates, 
Mrs.  T.  Ashby  Blythe, 
Elizabeth  Powell  Bond, 

Clellan  A.  Bowman, 
Thomas  B.  Brown, 

R.  K.  Buehrle, 

George  Burnham  Jr., 
Walter  Calley, 

Mrs.  Walter  Calley, 

J.  B.  Carlock, 

Laura  H.  Carnell, 

Arabella  Carter, 

Laning  Coates, 

Thomas  Close, 

Henry  C.  Cochrane, 

Mrs.  Emma  Cooper, 
Rudolph  I.  Coffee, 

Matthew  Coar, 

C.  W.  F.  Coffin, 

George  R.  Dabney, 

Bishop  J.  H.  Darlington, 

L.  M.  Davis, 

Harold  W.  Davis, 

Pres.  H.  T.  Drinker, 

Mrs.  H.  T.  Drinker, 

Mrs.  Sarah  B.  Flitcraft, 

Dr.  Robert:  S.  Friedman, 
Robert  Good, 

Rev.  L.  Y.  Graham, 

Mrs.  L.  Y.  Graham, 

Mrs.  S.  Richardson  Griffith, 
Cornelia  Hancock, 

Hon.  Alfred  Hand, 

Walter  W.  Haviland, 

Samuel  L.  Hartman, 

J.  W.  Hays, 


474 

PENNSYLVANIA. 

United  Daughters  of  Confederacy,  Philadel- 
phia. 

Universal  Peace  Union,  Philadelphia. 

City  of  Scranton,  Scranton. 

Friends  Peace  Association,  Philadelphia. 
Meadville  Theological  School,  Meadville. 
Committee  of  Friends,  Philadelphia. 

25th  Pennsylvania  District,  Meadville. 

United  Daughters  of  Confederacy,  Philadelphia. 
Philanthropic  Committee  of  Friends,  Swarth- 
more. 

Dean  of  Albright  College,  Meyerstown. 

Phila.  Friends,  Yearly  Meeting,  Westchester. 
School  Dept,  of  Lancaster,  Lancaster. 

Trades  League,  Philadelphia. 

Upland  Baptist  Church,  Upland. 

Upland  Baptist  Church,  Upland. 

Lehigh  University,  South  Bethlehem. 

Temple  College,  Philadelphia. 

Universal  Peace  Union,  Philadelphia. 

State  of  Pennsylvania,  Philadelphia. 

Central  Labor  Union,  Plymouth. 

City  of  Chester,  Chester. 

Universal  Peace  Union,  Philadelphia. 

Tree  of  Life  Congregation,  Pittsburg. 

Technical  High  School,  Scranton. 

Franklin  Public  High  School,  Franklin. 
International  Typographical  Union,  Pittsburg. 
Episcopal  Church,  Harrisburg. 

First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  Towanda. 
Scranton  High  School,  Scranton. 

Lehigh  University,  South  Bethlehem. 

Lehigh  University,  South  Bethlehem. 

Woman’s  Suffrage  Association,  Chester. 
Universal  Peace  Union,  Philadelphia. 

Central  Labor  Union,  Berwick. 

Presbyterian  Ministerial  Ass’n,  Philadelphia. 
Olivet  Presbyterian  Church,  Philadelphia. 
Pennsylvania  Peace  Society,  Philadelphia. 
Universal  Peace  Union,  Philadelphia. 

City  of  Scranton,  Scranton. 

Philadelphia  Peace  Ass’n  of  Friends,  Phila- 
delphia. 

Young  Men’s  Christian  Ass’n,  Lancaster. 
International  Typographical  Union,  Philadel- 
phia. 


Lewis  Heck, 

John  P.  Helfenstein, 

E.  C.  Helfenstein, 

Rt.  Rev.  Bishop  Hoban, 

Guy  W.  Hodges, 

Mrs.  Emilie  R.  Hoffman, 

G.  W.  Holt, 

Rev.  William  Hutton, 

Mrs.  T.  A.  Janvier, 

T.  D.  Jones, 

N.  B.  Kelly, 

Patience  W.  Kent, 

Mr.  Kniffen, 

Frank  D.  La  Lanne, 

Rev.  John  Clarence  Lee, 

S.  McCune  Lindsay, 

Alfred  H.  Love, 

Matthew  Lynott, 

Eliphalet  Oram  Lyte, 

S.  B.  McCormick, 

Mrs.  Edgar  Marburg, 

Albert  E.  McKinley, 

Mrs.  Albert  E.  McKinley, 
Pres.  J.  D.  Moffatt, 

Rebecca  Moore, 

Ledlie  Moore, 

H.  W.  Palmer, 

Dr.  G.  M.  Philips, 

Arthur  J.  Phillips, 

H.  G.  Prout, 

Francis  Rawle, 

Pres.  George  Edward  Reed, 
Mrs.  George  Edward  Reed, 
Ellwood  Roberts, 

Mrs.  Ellwood  Roberts, 

S.  A.  Rook, 

Nathan  C.  Schaeffer, 

Bertha  Sellers, 

Garrett  Spiers, 

R.  B.  Spicer, 

H.  D.  Smith, 

Lee  S.  Smith, 

Hugh  Tormay, 


475 

Lehigh  University,  South  Bethlehem. 

City  of  Shamokin,  Shamokin. 

City  of  Shamokin,  Shamokin. 

City  of  Scranton,  Scranton. 

Public  High  School,  Scranton. 

Temple  College,  Philadelphia. 

Franklin  Public  High  School,  Franklin. 
Presbyterian  Ministerial  Ass’n,  Philadelphia. 
Lehigh  University,  South  Bethlehem. 

City  of  Hazleton,  Hazleton. 

Trades  League,  Philadelphia. 

Women’s  Suffrage  League,  Swarthmore. 
Lehigh  University,  South  Bethlehem. 

City  of  Philadelphia,  Philadelphia. 
Pennsylvania  Peace  Society,  Philadelphia. 
Amer.  Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Science, 
Philadelphia. 

Universal  Peace  Union,  Philadelphia. 

Technical  High  School  Scranton. 

State  of  Pennsylvania,  Millersville. 

Chamber  of  Commerce,  Pittsburg. 

United  Daughters  of  Confederacy,  Philadel- 
phia. 

Temple  College  of  Philadelphia,  Germantown. 
Temple  College  of  Philadelphia,  Germantown. 
Washington  and  Jefferson  College,  Wash- 
ington. 

Penn.  Peace  Society,  Philadelphia. 

Lehigh  University,  South  Bethlehem. 

General  Committee,  Wilkesbarre. 

State  of  Pennsylvania,  West  Chester. 

Public  High  School,  Scranton. 

Chamber  of  Commerce,  Pittsburg. 

Delegate  at  Large,  Philadelphia. 

Dickinson  College,  Carlisle. 

Dickinson  College,  Carlisle. 

Philanthropic  Com.  of  Phila,  Norristown. 
Philanthropic  Com.  of  Phila,  Norristown. 
Chamber  of  Commerce,  Pittsburg. 

City  of  Harrisburg,  Harrisburg. 

The  Swarthmore  First  Day  School,  Swarth- 
more. 

Lehigh  University,  South  Bethlehem. 

Genl.  Conference  of  Friends  Ass’n,  Phila- 
delphia. 

Lehigh  University,  South  Bethlehem. 

Chamber  of  Commerce,  Pittsburg. 

Central  Labor  Union,  Plymouth. 


476 

Maud  Thompson,  Pennsylvania  Peace  Society,  Philadelphia. 

Pres.  M.  Carey  Thomas,  Bryn  Mawr  College,  Bryn  Mawr. 

Ethelbert  D.  Warfield,  Lafayette  College,  Easton. 

Mrs.  Elizabeth  H.  Webster,  Universal  Peace  Union,  Philadelphia. 


Mrs.  M.  S.  Wetherell, 

Woman’s  Christian  Temperance  Union,  Phila- 
delphia. 

Henry  W.  Wilbur, 

Mrs.  Mary  E.  Wilson, 
Mrs.  M.  R.  Williams, 

J.  D.  Wooding, 

Stanley  R.  Yarnall, 

Anna  Rice  Powell, 

Pilgrim’s  Society  of  Friends,  Swarthmore. 
First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  Franklin. 
Philadelphia  Peace  Society,  Philadelphia. 
Albright  College,  Myerstown. 

Peace  Ass’n  of  Friends,  Germantown. 

Phila.  Com.  of  Friends,  Philadelphia. 

Cyrus  R.  Aldrich, 

Sarah  M.  Aldrich, 

James  H.  Chase, 

Mrs.  James  H„  Chase, 
Mary  K.  Conyngton, 

Mrs.  A.  Cook  Dewing, 
Mrs.  Geo.  D.  Gladding, 
Robert  A.  Kenyon, 
Thomas  Park, 

Charles  Sisson, 

Mrs.  Charles  Sisson, 

Rev.  A.  S.  Wicks, 

RHODE  ISLAND. 

Pawtucket  Women’s  Suffrage,  E.  Providence. 
Pawtucket  Women’s  Suffrage,  E.  Providence. 
Rhode  Island  Peace  Society,  Providence. 

Rhode  Island  Peace  Society,  Providence. 

Rhode  Island  Peace  Society,  Providence. 

Rhode  Island  Peace  Society,  Providence. 

Local  Council  of  Rhode  Island,  Providence. 
City  of  Pawtucket,  Pawtucket. 

City  of  Pawtucket,  Pawtucket. 

Rhode  Island  Peace  Society,  Providence. 

Rhode  Island  Peace  Society,  Providence. 

City  of  Pawtucket,  Pawtucket. 

John  J.  Dargan, 

B.  W.  Montgomery, 

SOUTH  CAROLINA. 

State  Teachers’  Association,  Statesburg. 

South  Carolina  United  Daughters  Confederacy, 
Marion, 

Mrs.  W.  0.  Southard, 

John  Hames  Chapter  United  Daughters  Con- 
federacy, Jonesville. 

Rev.  G.  B.  Winton, 

TENNESSEE. 

Christian  Advocate,  Nashville. 

Rabbi  Theodore  F.  Joseph,  Mizpah  Congregation,  Chattanooga. 


Charles  H.  Silliman, 

S.  P.  Brooks, 

TEXAS. 

First  Baptist  Church,  Ft.  Worth. 

Baylor  University,  Waco. 

John  P.  Meakin, 

J.  M.  Sjodahl, 

UTAH. 

State  of  Utah,  Salt  Lake  City. 

“Deseret  News,”  Salt  Lake  City. 

Joseph  Auld, 

I.  M.  Bregstein, 

Rev.  F.  L.  Bullard, 

L.  Bart  Crass, 

Joseph  A.  DeBoer, 

Rev.  Edward  D.  Eaton, 

M.  W.  Messer, 

Rev.  H.  R.  Miles, 

Rev.  Wm.  J.  O’Sullivan, 
Clarence  H.  Senter, 
Albert  Tuttle, 


Harris  Hart, 

Wyndham  R.  Meredith, 
A.  J.  Montague, 

Rev.  R.  A.  Robinson, 
William  W.  Smith, 


477 

VERMONT. 

State  of  Vermont,  Burlington. 

City  of  Burlington,  Burlington. 

Rutland  Conferences  of  Congregational 
Churches,  Brandon. 

City  of  Montpelier,  Montpelier. 

City  of  Montpelier,  Montpelier. 

North  Congregational  Church,  St.  Johnsbury. 
Unitarian  Church,  Windsor. 

Centre  Congregational  Church,  Brattleboro. 
City  of  Montpelier,  Montpelier. 

City  of  Montpelier,  Montpelier. 

City  of  Montpelier,  Montpelier. 

VIRGINIA 

City  of  Roanoke,  Roanoke. 

Virginia  League  of  Peace,  Richmond. 

Virginia  League  for  International  Arbitration, 
Richmond. 

City  of  Norfolk,  Norfolk. 

Delegate  at  Large,  Lynchburg. 


Thomas  H.  Anderson, 
Charles  Henry  Butler, 

Mrs.  Marion  Butler, 

Mrs.  George  K.  Gaulding, 
Samuel  Gompers, 

Rev.  Edward  Everett  Hale, 
William  L.  Hall, 

E.  M.  Hawley, 

J.  B.  Henderson,  Jr., 

Miss  Hill, 

Archibald  Hopkins, 

Belva  A.  Lockwood, 

Mrs.  E.  Clark  Morgan, 

Pres.  Charles  W.  Needham, 
Thomas  Nelson  Page, 

Mrs.  Arthur  Ramsey, 

Rabbi  Abram  Simon, 

Cotton  Smith, 

A.  H.  Snow, 

Robert  Stein, 

Herbert  Wadsworth, 

H.  E.  Warner, 


WASHINGTON,  D.  C. 

Local  Organization  of  Washington. 
Washington  Conciliation  Society. 

United  Daughters  of  Confederacy. 

United  Daughters  of  Confederacy. 

American  Federation  of  Labor. 

Peace  Society  of  Washington. 

American  Forestry  Association. 

Diplomacy  School  of  George  Washington 
University. 

International  Arbitration  Treaty  Conference. 
League  of  American  Pen  Women. 
Washington  Peace  Conference. 

Universal  Peace  Union. 

District  of  Columbia  Federation  of  Women 
Clubs. 

George  Washington  University. 

International  Arbitration  Treaty  Conference. 
Twentieth  Century  Club. 

City  of  Washington. 

City  of  Washington. 

Washington  Peace  Association. 

Universal  Peace  Union. 

City  of  Washington. 

Local  Resident  Com.  of  Arbitration  Peace 
Conference. 


Minnie  Bradley, 

Mrs.  Wm.  H.  Crosby, 

Richard  T.  Ely, 

H.  T.  Ferguson, 
Janies  Jenkins, 


Mrs.  Etta  M.  Roach, 


Alexis  Aladin, 


A.  B.  Barthe, 
Justice  Fitzgerald, 
Mrs.  Fitzgerald, 
H.  E.  Irwin,  K.C., 

Miss  E.  Rundblad, 


478 

WISCONSIN. 

Woman’s  Club,  Racine. 

Wisconsin  Federation  of  Women’s  Clubs,  Ra- 
cine. 

American  Economic  Association,  Madison. 
St.  Andrews  Society  of  Milwaukee,  Milwaukee. 
The  School  Philanthropy,  Oshkosh. 

WYOMING. 

“Laramie  Republic,”  Laramie. 

FOREIGN  DELEGATES. 

Parliamentary  Group  of  Second  Russian 
Duma ; Special  Envoy  to  the  International 
Peace  Conference  held  in  House  of  Com- 
mons, England,  1906,  Russia. 

Secolo,  Milan. 

City  of  Charlottetown,  P.  E.  I.,  Canada. 

City  of  Charlottetown,  P.  E.  I.,  Canada. 
Canadian  Peace  and  Arbitration  Society, 
Toronto,  Canada. 

Swedish  Peace  Society,  Orebro,  Sweden. 


'12 


Rev.  Jenkin  Lloyd  Jones 
John  E.  Milholland 


Prof.  John  Bassett  Moore 
Henry  M.  Leipziger 


Prof.  George  W.  Kirchwey  Prof.  Samuel  T.  Dutton 
Marcus  M.  Marks  Mrs.  Anna  Garlin  Spencer 
H.  C.  Phillips  Miss  Mary  J.  Pierson 


Edwin  D.  Mead 
Charles  Sprague  Smith 
Hayne  Davis 


THE  EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE 


Mahlon  N.  Kline 
Stanley  R.  Yarnell 


Hamilton  Holt 
Rev.  Frederick  Lynch 
Dr.  Ernst  Richard 


Robert  Erskine  Ely 
Mrs.  Frederick  Nathan 
Dr.  Benjamin  F.  Trueblood 
Mrs.  Henry  Villard 


George  Foster  Peabody 
James  B.  Reynolds 
Ralph  M.  Easley 


William  Christie  Herron 
Dr.  J.  Leonard  Levy 


THE  EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE 


